Namkung Et Al 2019 The Relation Between Mathematics Anxiety and Mathematics Performance Among School Aged Students A

843494
research-article2019
RERXXX10.3102/0034654319843494Namkung et al.Math Anxiety and Math Performance
Review of Educational Research

June 2019, Vol. 89, No. 3, pp. 459–496
DOI: 10.3102/0034654319843494
Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions
© 2019 AERA. http://rer.aera.net
The Relation Between Mathematics Anxiety and

Mathematics Performance Among School-Aged
Students: A Meta-Analysis
Jessica M. Namkung
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Peng Peng and Xin Lin

The University of Texas at Austin
The purpose of this meta-analysis was to examine the relation between math-
ematics anxiety (MA) and mathematics performance among school-aged stu-
dents, and to identify potential moderators and underlying mechanisms of such
relation, including grade level, temporal relations, difficulty of mathematical
tasks, dimensions of MA measures, effects on student grades, and working
memory. A meta-analysis of 131 studies with 478 effect sizes was conducted.
The results indicated that a significant negative correlation exist between MA
and mathematics performance, r = −.34. Moderation analyses indicated that
dimensions of MA, difficulty of mathematical tasks, and effects on student
grades differentially affected the relation between MA and mathematics perfor-
mance. MA assessed with both cognitive and affective dimensions showed a
stronger negative correlation with mathematics performance compared to MA
assessed with either an affective dimension only or mixed/unspecified dimen-
sions. Advanced mathematical tasks that require multistep processes showed a
stronger negative correlation to MA compared to foundational mathematical
tasks. Mathematics measures that affected/reflected student grades (e.g., final
exam, students’ course grade, GPA) had a stronger negative correlation to MA
than did other measures of mathematics performance that did not affect student
grades (e.g., mathematics measures administered as part of research).
Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.
Keywords: mathematics anxiety, mathematics performance
Mathematical proficiency is critical not only for science, technology, engi-

neering, and mathematics (STEM)–related fields but also for daily life experi-
ences in today’s high-technology world. In past decades, many national and
international studies have identified cognitive, linguistic, and environmental
459
Namkung et al.
factors associated with poor mathematics performance (e.g., working memory
in Passolunghi & Siegel, 2004; Peng, Namkung, Barnes, & Sun, 2016;
Swanson & Jerman, 2006; language in Fuchs et al., 2006; Namkung & Fuchs,
2016; parental involvement in Hong, Yoo, You, & Wu, 2010; Puklek Levpušček
& Zupančič, 2009). Among those, mathematics anxiety (MA) has been found
to be consistently related to poor mathematics performance (e.g., Hembree,
1990; Ma, 1999; Ramirez, Gunderson, Levine, & Beilock, 2013; Vukovic,
Kieffer, Bailey, & Harari, 2013; Wigfield & Meece, 1988). MA refers to feel-
ings of tension, fear, and physiological reaction (i.e., negative affect) and self-
deprecatory thoughts and worries about one’s performance (i.e., negative
cognition) that interfere with solving mathematics problems in ordinary life
and academic situations (Ho et al., 2000; Richardson & Suinn, 1972; Wigfield
& Meece, 1988). Thus, MA is conceptualized as a multidimensional construct
that is related to but distinct from other forms of anxiety, such as trait anxiety,
social anxiety, and test anxiety (Ashcraft & Moore, 2009; Vukovic, Kieffer,
et al., 2013).
Furthermore, prior findings indicate that students with MA enjoy mathemat-
ics less, are less motivated and less confident in mathematics, and avoid taking
mathematics courses in school (e.g., Ashcraft, Kirk, & Hopko, 1998; Hembree,
1990; Meece, Wigfield, & Eccles, 1990). This, in turn, has long-term conse-
quences on college and career paths, such as avoiding STEM majors, not pur-
suing higher education, and avoiding careers that require mathematics
competence. Thus, understanding the relation between MA and mathematics
performance and the factors that may affect and explain such relations is criti-
cal. Such information can provide theoretical understanding of the relation
between MA and mathematics performance as well as practical guidance on
intervention targets.
To our knowledge, two previous meta-analysis studies by Hembree (1990) and
Ma (1999) exist on the relation between MA and mathematics performance. These
studies, primarily with secondary students, indicated that a moderate, negative
relation exist between MA and mathematics performance (i.e., r = −.34 in
Hembree, 1990; r = −.27 in Ma, 1999). Although the previous studies provided a
foundation for understanding the relation between MA and mathematics perfor-
mance, many questions remain unanswered. First, the previous meta-analyses
included only a small number of studies with school-aged students: Ma’s (1999)
meta-analysis, which exclusively targeted school-aged students, included 26 stud-
ies across Grades 4 and 12, and Hembree’s (1990) meta-analysis included 17
studies across Grades 5 and 12 and 58 studies with college students. Given that
MA is negatively correlated with mathematics performance, understanding the
relation between MA and mathematics performance among school-aged students
when mathematics learning is actively occurring is critical for remediation and
early intervention purposes.
Second, among the limited studies that have targeted school-aged students in
the previous meta-analyses, most studies exclusively focused on secondary stu-
dents. For example, of 26 studies targeting school-aged students in Ma (1999),
only three studies included a mix of elementary to middle school students
(Grades 4–6) with the remaining studies including only secondary students.
460
Math Anxiety and Math Performance
This reflects the paucity of MA research among younger students prior to 1999,
which may largely stem from the traditional model of MA, in which MA was
thought to develop after fourth grade, after students have had enough negative
experiences in learning and performing mathematics (i.e., deficit theory, which
is explained further below). The limited number of MA measures for younger
children may have also contributed to the lack of research among young chil-
dren (Lichtenfled, Pekrun, Stupnisky, Reiss, & Murayama, 2012; Vukovic,
Kieffer, et al., 2013). Because MA measures rely on self-reports, most available
MA measures were designed for older students, and MA measures for younger
children are still being developed and validated. However, recent studies indi-
cate that MA occurs as early as in kindergarten and first grade (e.g., Aarnos &
Perkkilä, 2012; Krinzinger, Kaufmann, & Willmes, 2009; Ramirez et al., 2013).
Therefore, an updated synthesis with studies in elementary grades is needed to
examine whether the relation between MA and mathematics performance dif-
fers for younger students.
Third, potential moderating factors and mechanisms that may underline the
relation between MA and mathematics performance have not been fully
explored. Although some limited moderating factors, such as gender, grade
level, race, and MA instrument, have been explored in Ma (1999), nonsignifi-
cant effects were found by him when all moderators were simultaneously con-
trolled for (more stringent analysis for moderating effects), likely due to the
insufficient number of reviewed studies. The only significant factor in Ma’s
study was publication bias, in which published articles reported weaker corre-
lations than unpublished articles. In a related way, although Hembree (1990)
synthesized the correlations between MA and other factors related to mathe-
matics performance, such as mathematics attitudes, their moderating roles
were never explored.
To address these limitations, in the present meta-analysis, we provided an
updated and more comprehensive synthesis on the relation between MA and
mathematics performance and factors affecting such relations, as well as mecha-
nisms underlying the relation. In the sections below, we describe theories relevant
to the relation between MA and mathematics performance and potential factors
that may be important to consider under each theory. Specifically, we examined
whether grade level, temporal relations, working memory, difficulty of mathemat-
ics skills, effects on student grades, and dimensions of MA affected the relation
between MA and mathematics performance.
Theories on the Relation Between MA and Mathematics Performance
Understanding the relation between MA and mathematics performance is
important not only theoretically but also practically for intervention purposes.
That is, if poor mathematics performance results in MA, intervention efforts
should be devoted to improving mathematics skills. On the other hand, if MA
leads to poor mathematics performance, intervention efforts should be focused
on alleviating MA and thereby improving mathematics performance. Indeed,
competing theories exist regarding the relation between MA and mathematics
performance: the deficit theory, the cognitive interference theory, and the recip-
rocal theory.
461
Namkung et al.
The deficit theory posits that poor mathematics performance and memories of
poor mathematics performance lead to higher MA in the future (Carey, Hill,
Devine, & Szücs, 2016; Tobias, 1986). Evidence supporting the deficit theory
largely comes from studies on students with mathematics learning disabilities and
longitudinal studies (Carey et al., 2016). Specifically, although limited studies
exist, students with mathematics learning disabilities reported disproportionately
high levels of MA compared to typically achieving peers in international studies
(e.g., Passolunghi, 2011; Rubinsten & Tannock, 2010), partially supporting the
deficit theory. In addition, Ma and Xu (2004) analyzed 6-year longitudinal data
from secondary students, following them from Grade 7 to Grade 12 to examine
the causal direction of the relation between MA and mathematics performance
using cross-lagged structural equation modeling. They found that prior low math-
ematics performance was significantly and negatively correlated with later MA,
but prior MA was not significantly related to later low mathematics performance,
providing strong support for the deficit theory.
On the other hand, the cognitive interference theory (also referred to as debili-
tation anxiety model) posits that it is MA that affects subsequent mathematics
performance. The interference mechanism lies in three ways, during preprocess-
ing, processing, and retrieval of information (Carey et al., 2016; Deutsch &
Tobias, 1980; Tobias, 1986). During pre–information processing, MA leads stu-
dents to avoid mathematics-related situations. Prior findings, including Hembree’s
(1990) synthesis, provide insight on how MA may lead to poor mathematics per-
formance during pre–information processing. That is, not only did students with
MA enjoy mathematics less, and they were less motivated and confident in math-
ematics, they also avoided taking mathematics courses in school and were less
likely to enroll on college or university courses in mathematics (e.g., Ashcraft
et al., 1998; Hembree, 1990; Meece, Wigfield, & Eccles, 1990). This would lead
to reduced mathematics learning opportunities and subsequent lower mathematics
performance. Another mechanism that may underlie the cognitive interference
theory is closely related to the theories of working memory (further discussed
below). During information processing and recall, MA affects mathematics per-
formance by creating cognitive interference. That is, worries and intrusive
thoughts elicited by MA may tax working memory resources that should be
devoted to solving mathematical tasks, thereby negatively affecting mathematics
performance. The last evidence comes from MA intervention studies. Intervention
studies focused on alleviating MA (e.g., cognitive behavioral therapies) that did
not have any mathematics components have resulted in improved mathematics
performance (Hembree, 1990). This finding suggests that MA, not preexisting
mathematics skills deficits, may be the source of poor mathematics performance,
supporting the cognitive interference theory.
Alternatively, the conflicting evidence may indicate that MA and mathematics
performance have a bidirectional relation, supporting the reciprocal theory
(Ashcraft & Krause, 2007; Carey et al., 2016). According to the reciprocal theory,
past failure and negative experiences in mathematics performance may lead to
MA, which subsequently leads to poorer mathematics performance, and vice
versa. In a broader context, the control-value theory of achievement emotions
proposed by Pekrun (2006) supports the bidirectional relation between MA and
462
mathematics performance. According to the control-value theory, MA is defined
as negative activating emotions that impair attention, motivation, and self-regula-
tion, thereby leading to poor performance, which subsequently shapes percep-
tions and emotions over mathematics performance.
This bidirectional relation between MA and mathematics performance has
been documented in several studies (Cargnelutti, Tomasetto, & Passolunghi,
2017b; Luo, Hogan, et al., 2014). Luo, Hogan, et al. (2014) found that previous
mathematics performance affects students’ MA, which in turn, affects future
mathematics performance in their Singapore sample of secondary students.
Similar findings were also found with younger students. For example, in a lon-
gitudinal study examining the bidirectionality of MA and mathematics perfor-
mance, Cargnelutti, Tomasetto, and Passolunghi (2017a) found that the effects
of mathematics performance on MA was the strongest in Grade 2 while MA in
Grade 2 also had significant indirect effects on future mathematics performance.
In third grade, the effects of MA on mathematics performance was the strongest.
The authors suggested that poor mathematics performance first boosts MA,
which subsequently and negatively affects mathematics performance in a
vicious cycle.
Factors That May Affect or Explain the Relation Between MA and Mathematics
Performance
Based on the theories discussed above, there are several important factors that
need to be considered in examining the relation between MA and mathematics
performance.
Deficit Theory: Grade Level

Based on the deficit theory, MA was originally hypothesized to develop
around fourth grade after students have had enough negative experience as they
encounter increasingly challenging mathematics (e.g., Tankersley, 1993; Yeo,
2005). MA would then continue to increase through middle school years and
reach its peak in 9th and 10th grades, followed by a leveling off during later high
school and college (Hembree, 1990; Vukovic, Kieffer, et al., 2013). In line with
this perspective, both prior meta-analyses reported that the severity of MA
increased over time (Hembree, 1990; Ma, 1999). Thus, the deficit theory and the
evidence from previous meta-analyses suggest that younger students in lower
elementary grades who have had fewer experiences with mathematics should not
experience significant MA or should experience MA only to a very minimal
extent, leading to minimal variance in MA among younger children. However,
following studies that found even simple numerical tasks, such as counting, can
also elicit MA among adults (Maloney, Ansari, & Fugelsang, 2011; Maloney,
Risko, Ansari, & Fugelsang, 2010), studies have started to shift their focus on
MA in young children. Growing evidence indicates that children as young as
kindergarten and first grade experience MA (e.g., Aarnos & Perkkilä, 2012;
Krinzinger et al., 2009; Ramirez et al., 2013). Given the increased focus on MA
among young children, the present meta-analysis aimed to clarify whether the
relation between MA and mathematics performance is similar for elementary
students compared to secondary students.
463
Cognitive Interference Theory: Working Memory and Difficulty of Mathematical
Tasks
Based on the cognitive interference theory, working memory may play a key
role in the underlying the relation between MA and mathematics performance.
Working memory is a limited cognitive resource used to hold information in the
mental system while simultaneously operating on or manipulating that informa-
tion (Baddeley, Logie, Bressi, Sala, & Spinnler, 1986). The role of working mem-
ory in mathematics competence has been investigated extensively, with many
studies reporting a significant relation between working memory and different
types of mathematics performance (e.g., Peng et al., 2016). Anxiety-induced cog-
nitions, such as intrusive thoughts and worries, create a dual-task situation, in
which students must deal with their negative cognition in addition to solving the
mathematics problem at hand (Ashcraft & Faust, 1994; Ashcraft & Kirk, 2001).
This would delete limited working memory, resulting in slower response time and
higher error rates, thereby reducing processing efficiency and leading to poorer
mathematics performance.
In a related way, difficulty of mathematical tasks may also differentially affect
the MA and mathematics performance relation. That is, in addition to MA itself,
more difficult tasks may tax cognitive resources and, therefore, have greater nega-
tive effects on mathematics performance.
Although the most commonly investigated domain of mathematics perfor-
mance in relation to MA is calculations, there is some evidence to support this
hypothesis. For example, Vukovic, Kieffer, et al. (2013) found that MA does not
affect all types of mathematics performance equally. MA uniquely predicted chil-
dren’s calculation and mathematical application skills but not geometric reason-
ing. The authors suggested that geometry in the younger grades (e.g., identifying
shapes) may not be difficult enough to elicit MA. Ching (2017) also found that
complex mathematics problems that require more cognitive processing in contrast
to simple arithmetic problems elicited higher MA among second and third grades
students with high working memory capacity. Both studies suggest that the rela-
tion between MA and mathematics performance may differ as a function of dif-
ficulty of mathematical problems.
Therefore, prior research suggests that the effects of MA on mathematics per-
formance may differ by the difficulty of mathematical problems. In the present
meta-analysis, based on the prior findings by Ching (2017) and Vukovic, Kieffer,
et al. (2013), we focused on two types of mathematics performance, foundational
versus advanced. Foundational skills were defined as early-numeracy and basic-
arithmetic facts that do not require multistep processes whereas advanced skills
were defined as those that require multistep processes, such as procedural compu-
tation, word problem solving, and algebra.
Bidirectional Theory: Temporal Relations

Based on the three competing theories on the causal link between MA and
mathematics performance, one may expect different patterns of findings as a
function of temporal relations (i.e., concurrent, longitudinal: MP [mathematics
performance]→ MA, longitudinal: MA → MP). If poor mathematics performance
results in MA (i.e., deficit theory), then we may expect a stronger relation between
464
MA and mathematics performance in longitudinal studies, in which early mathe-
matics performance predicts later MA, controlling for the early MA. However, if
MA leads to poor mathematics performance (i.e., cognitive interference theory),
we may expect a stronger relation in longitudinal studies, in which early MA pre-
dicts later mathematics performance, controlling for the early mathematics per-
formance. On the other hand, if MA and mathematic performance have a
bidirectional relation, then we would expect similar strengths of relations across
concurrent and longitudinal relations of MA and mathematics performance. To
our knowledge, the relation between MA and mathematics performance has never
been synthesized in the context of temporal relations. Although investing a causal
link between MA and mathematics performance requires experimental/interven-
tion studies, the current meta-analysis comparing concurrent and longitudinal cor-
relations can also provide some insights on the causal relation.
Besides grade level, working memory, difficulty of mathematics skills, and
temporal relations that were directly guided by the theories of the relation between
MA and mathematics performance, dimensions of MA measures and types of
mathematics measures may also be important to understand the relation between
MA and mathematics performance.
Dimensions of MA
Self-report questionnaires, such as the Mathematics Anxiety Rating Scale
(MARS; Richardson & Suinn, 1972), are primarily used to measure MA. Although
MA was originally conceptualized as a unidimensional construct, following the
theoretical models of text anxiety (Liebert & Morris, 1967; Mandler & Sarason,
1952), Wigfield and Meece (1988) and Ho et al. (2000) identified two distinct
dimensions of MA, negative cognition (i.e., worry) and negative affect (i.e., nega-
tive emotions and physiological reactions), in both national and international
samples of students. Negative cognition refers to thoughts about one’s perfor-
mances and the expected consequences of failure (e.g., worry and self-depreca-
tory thoughts), and negative affect represents negative emotionality and physical
arousal (e.g., feeling nervous, tension, fear, and unpleasant physiological reac-
tions, such as palpitation) that occur when individuals perform mathematical
tasks in academic and every life situation.
Different patterns of associations exist as to which dimension is more strongly
related to MA. Both Wigfield and Meece (1988) and Ho et al. (2000) found that
the affective dimension was more consistently and more strongly correlated with
mathematics performance compared to the cognitive dimension. This finding is in
contrary to the test anxiety literature. In test anxiety, negative cognition has been
found to be consistently related to test performance whereas negative affect has
been found to show mixed findings, with some studies supporting the negative
correlation, but to a lesser extent than negative cognition (e.g., Deffenbacher,
1986; Doctor & Altman, 1969; Sharma & Rao, 1983) and some reporting no sig-
nificant relations (e.g., Liebert & Morris, 1967; Morris & Liebert, 1970).
Furthermore, it is not clear which dimension/dimensions of MA is/are assessed
with which measures, making it difficult to clarify whether the MA and mathe-
matics performance relation is more strongly related to negative affect or nega-
tive cognition. For example, some researchers used confidence in mathematics
465
Namkung et al.
as a proxy for MA (e.g., Berman, 1985) or included it as part of MA dimensions
(e.g., Ganley & McGraw, 2016), whereas some researchers assessed the affective
dimension only (e.g., Bosmans & De Smedt, 2015; Chiu & Henry, 1990; Hopko,
Mahadeva, Bare, & Hunt, 2003). However, others used MA measures that assess
both affective and cognitive dimensions, making it difficult to parse out whether
MA assessed with different dimensions shows differential relations to mathemat-
ics performance (e.g., Catapano, 2013; Frenzel, Thrash, Pekrun, & Goetz, 2007;
Stoet, Bailey, Moore, & Geary, 2016). Although Ma (1999) synthesized the
effects of different MA measures used in the studies, he compared the relation
between MA and mathematics performance assessed using MARS, which mea-
sures the affective dimension, versus all other measures. Ma (1999) found no
significant differences in correlations between mathematics performance and
MA assessed by MARS or other measures. However, because the comparison
was between MARS and all other measures, meaningful interpretations could not
be made. Therefore, further clarification is needed to examine the relation
between MA and mathematics performance with MA measures targeting differ-
ent dimensions of MA.
Effects of Mathematics Measures on Grades

Although limited studies exist, prior findings suggest that students with MA
perform worse on timed mathematical tasks and high-stakes mathematics tests
(Ashcraft & Krause, 2007; Kellogg, Hopko, & Ashcraft, 1999). Kellogg et al.
(1999) compared arithmetic performance of college students with high and low
MA in both a timed and an untimed condition. They found that although time
pressure did not differentially affect students with high versus low MA, both
groups of students did perform worse when they had to solve arithmetic problems
in a timed condition. Similarly, high-stakes tests may elicit more MA. In the pres-
ent meta-analysis, although we could not examine time and high-stakes tests
effects due to the small number of studies, we explored another related factor,
whether mathematics measures that affect/reflect student grades differentially
affect the MA and mathematics performance relation. We defined mathematics
assessments that were administered as part of typical assessment at school there-
fore affected student grades (GPA, course grade, final exam) as “effects on grade”
and other measures, such as measures that were administered as part of research
studies, as “no effects on grade.”
Current Meta-Analysis
To sum, the purpose of present meta-analysis was to examine the relation
between MA and mathematics performance among school-aged students and to
identify potential moderators and underlying mechanisms of such relation. Based
on the deficit theory, we would expect that secondary students show a stronger
relation between MA and mathematics performance than elementary students
who may show little or no variance in MA. Based on the cognitive interference
theory, we hypothesized that working memory (at least) partially explains the
relation between MA and mathematics performance. Based on the reciprocal
theory, the relation between MA and mathematics performance relation should
not vary as a function of temporal relations. We further hypothesized that the
466
correlations between MA and mathematics performance are larger for more dif-
ficult mathematics measures and those that affect school grades than they are for
foundational and those that have no effects on school grades. In addition, based
on Wigfield and Meece (1988) and Ho et al. (2000), we hypothesized that the
affective dimension of MA may show a stronger relation to mathematics perfor-
mance than the cognitive dimension.
Method
Literature Search
Articles included in this meta-analysis were identified in three ways.
First, a computer search of the PsycINFO, ProQuest, ERIC, and MEDLINE
databases was conducted during June 2018 using the following search terms
with different combinations of Boolean operators “AND” and “OR”: arith-
metic, math*, numerical, anxiety. The search was restricted to studies in
English involving early childhood, elementary, and/or secondary students.
Second, we searched unpublished literature through Cochrane Database of
Systematic Reviews and relevant conference programs (e.g., American
Educational Research Association, National Council for Teachers of
Mathematics). Last, reference lists from previous relevant reviews (i.e.,
Aiken, 1976, Hembree, 1990, Ma, 1999) were hand searched to include any
articles not identified with the first two electronic search steps. The initial
search yielded 1,727 studies. Additional 13 studies were identified as eligi-
ble through other methods, such as hand searching references of previous
meta-analyses. Figure 1 illustrates the literature search and screening pro-
cess described below. After removing 261 duplicate studies, the first and
third authors reviewed all studies by reading titles and abstracts first, locat-
ing any promising studies based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria
described below. This preliminary screening excluded 52 studies for age
(e.g., college and above), six studies that were not in English, and 1,038
studies that were not relevant.
Full articles of the resulting 383 studies were obtained and reviewed carefully
for eligibility. Of the 383 studies, 48 studies were further excluded because they
did not have a valid measure of MA. Additionally, 117 studies were excluded
because they did not have a mathematics measure, or because mathematics per-
formance was based on teachers’ subjective ratings of student performance, rather
than an actual mathematics assessment. A total of 81 studies that had both MA and
mathematics performance measures, but did not report a direct bivariate correla-
tion, or did not indicate whether the correlation was from prior to implementing a
MA intervention, were excluded. Library systems were unable to locate six stud-
ies. A total of 252 studies were excluded from 383 studies in the second screening,
resulting in a total of 131 studies, including 108 peer-reviewed articles, 21 unpub-
lished dissertations, and two reports, for the final meta-analysis.
Study Selection Criteria
Studies were eligible for this meta-analysis if they met all the following crite-
ria. First, studies had to include at least one measure of MA. MA was specifically
467
Figure 1. Flowchart of the search and screening process. MA = mathematics anxiety.
defined as a measure of either negative affect (e.g., feeling of nervousness, ten-

sion, and unpleasant physiological reactions, such as heart palpitations and
sweats) and/or negative cognition (e.g., worry, concern, and preoccupation)
involving any situations that require mathematical tasks (e.g., doing mathematics
homework, learning mathematics in class, and taking a mathematics exam).
Therefore, MA measures used had to include at least one or both dimensions of
MA. Studies that operationalized MA solely as other dimensions, such as confi-
dence in mathematics, were excluded (e.g., Berman, 1985). Examples of com-
monly used MA measures and their descriptions are provided in Table 1 for each
dimension MA assessed. Studies that assessed other domains of anxiety only,
such as trait anxiety, and test anxiety, or other domains of attitudes toward math-
ematics, such as mathematical beliefs and motivation, were not eligible. However,
studies that reported a separate MA subscale from a comprehensive measure of
other domains of anxiety and mathematics attitudes were eligible (e.g., MA sub-
scale from the Fennema-Sherammn Math Attitude Inventory in Thorndike-Christ,
1991; Tissot, 1997; Pedro, Wolleat, Fennema, & Becke, 1981; MA subscale from
468
Table 1
Commonly used MA measures and their descriptions
Domains of MA Name of MA measures Descriptions/examples Included studies
Affective Mathematics Anxiety Students rate how nervous or tense they feel in various MARS: Baya’a (1990); Delaney (1981); Kyttälä and
Rating Scale (MARS; mathematics-related situations in both school and everyday Björn (2014); Lupkowski and Schumacker (1991);
Richardson & Suinn, life (e.g., adding up a cash register receipt after buying several Richardson and Suinn (1972); Wahl (1986)
1972); Mathematics things, studying for a math test) on a 5-point scale. MARS-A: Bosmans and De Smedt (2015); Donnelly
Anxiety Rating Scale for (1986); Gliner (1987); Hadfield, Martin, and
Adolescents (MARS-A; Wooden (1992); Lewellyn (1990); S. F. Miller
Suinn & Edwards, (1991); Rhone (1990); Schoeck (1994); Sgroi
1982); Mathematics (1991); Soni and Kumari (2017)
Anxiety Rating MARS-E: Grays, Rhymer, and Swartzmiller (2017);
Scale–Elementary Hart et al. (2016); S. F. Miller (1991); Solazzo
Form (MARS-E; Suinn, (2008); Soni and Kumari (2017); Suinn, Taylor,
Taylor, & Edwards, and Edwards (1988); Suinn, Taylor, and Edwards
1988) (1989); Wang et al. (2014); Wang et al. (2015);
Wittman (1997)
Math Anxiety Scale Adopted items from MARS: Students rate how nervous they Beasley, Long, and Natali (2001); Chiu and Henry
for Children (Chiu & feel in 22 situations related to mathematics (e.g., walking into (1990); Erturan and Jansen (2015); Vidovic (1991)
Hendry, 1990) a math class, reading and interpreting graphs or charts) on a
4-point scale.
Abbreviated Math Students rate how anxious they feel in five situations relating to Carey, Devine, Hill, and Szűcs (2017); Caviola,
Anxiety Scale (Hopko, mathematics learning (e.g., completing a math worksheet) and Primi, Chiesi, and Mammarella (2017); Devine,
Mahadeva, Bare, & four situations relating to taking a mathematics test on a 5-point Hill, Carey, and Szűcs (2018); Justicia-Galiano,
Hunt, 2003) scale. Martín-Puga, Linares, and Pelegrina (2017); Hill
et al. (2016); Reali, Jiménez-Leal, Maldonado-
Carreño, Devine, and Szücs (2016); Wang,
Shakeshaft, Schofield, and Malanchini (2018)
Scale for Early Students rate how nervous they feel in 20 situations during math Cargnelutti, Tomasetto, and Passolunghi (2017a,
Mathematics Anxiety lessons or solving math problems on a 5-point scale (e.g., your 2017b); Wu, Willcutt, Escovar, and Menon
(Wu & Menon, 2012) teacher gives you a bunch of subtraction problems to work on). (2014); Wu et al. (2017)
(continued)
469
Table 1 (continued)
470
Domains of MA Name of MA measures Descriptions/examples Included studies
Cognitive N/A N/A N/A

Both Affective Programme for Students rate how much they agree/disagree with five statements Catapano (2013); Cheema and Sheridan (2015);
and cognitive International Student that describe feelings (e.g., I get very tense when I have to do Ferla, Valcke, and Cai (2009); Kalaycioglu
Assessment: Math mathematics homework) and worry (I worry that I will get poor (2015); J. Lee (2009); Luo, Aye, Hogan, Kaur, and
Anxiety Survey marks in mathematics) while performing mathematics-related Chan (2013); Luo, Hogan, et al. (2014); Perry,
tasks on a 4-point scale. Catapano, and Ramon (2016); Scherer and Siddiq
(2015); Stoet, Bailey, Moore, and Geary (2016);
Van der Beek, Van der Ven, Kroesbergen, and
Leseman (2017); Yıldırım (2012)
Fennema-Sherman Students rate how much they agree/disagree with 12 statements Lim and Chapman (2013); Pedro, Wolleat,
Mathematics Anxiety that describe feelings (e.g., Mathematics makes me feel Fennema, and Becke. (1981); Reavis (1987);
Subscale (Fennema & uncomfortable and nervous) and worry (I usually don’t worry Tissot (1997); Thorndike-Christ (1991)
Sherman, 1976) about my ability to solve mathematics problems) related to
mathematics on a 5-point scale.
Achievement Emotions Students rate how much they agree/disagree with six statements Frenzel, Thrash, Pekrun, and Goetz (2007); Goetz,
Questionnaire– that describe feelings (e.g., I feel tense and nervous in math Frenzel, Lüdtke, and Hall (2010); Goetz, Frenzel,
Mathematics (Pekrun, classes) and worry (e.g., During a math test, I worry that I will Pekrun, Hall, and Ludtke (2007); Kim, Park, and
Goetz, & Frenze, 2005) get a bad grade) during mathematics instruction, homework, and Cozart (2014); Litchtenfeld, Pekrun, Stupnisky,
testing on a 5-point scale. Reiss, and Murayama (2012); Pekrun, Lichtenfeld,
Marsh, Murayama, and Goetz (2017)
Math Anxiety Students rate how much they agree/disagree with 11 statements Kyttälä and Björn (2010); Siebers (2015); Williams
Questionnaire (Wigfield that describe feelings (e.g., I dread having to do math) and (1994); Wigfield and Meece (1988)
& Meece, 1988) worry (e.g., In general, I worry about how well I am doing in
math; I worry that other student might understand the problem
better than I do when the teacher is showing the class how to do
a math problem) on a 7-point scale.
Mixed Mathematics Anxiety Students rate how much they agree/ disagree with 14 states Bai (2011); Hamid, Shahrill, Matzin, Mahalle, and
Scale–Revised (Bai, that describe attitudes toward mathematics (e.g., I find math Mundia (2013)
Wang, Pan, & Frey, interesting; Math relates to my life; Math is one of my favorite
2009) subjects: I would like to take more math classes), feelings, (e.g.,
Mathematics makes me feel nervous), and worry (e.g., I worry
about my ability to solve a math problem) about mathematics.
Researcher-developed Students mark yes or no to 20 questions about attitudes, worry, Sepie and Keeling (1978)
and feelings about mathematics (e.g., Do mathematical symbols
worry you? Do you have bad dreams about mathematics?)
the Achievement Emotions Questionnaire-Mathematics in Ahmed, Minnaert, van
der Werf, & Kuyper, 2010).
Second, studies had to include at least one assessment of mathematics.
Studies that used teachers’ ratings of mathematics performance to index math-
ematics performance (e.g., Bong 2009; second graders mathematics perfor-
mance ratings in Lichtenfeld et al., 2012; Wong, 1992) as well as studies that
did not report any information about their mathematics performance measure
were excluded (e.g., Venkatesh Kumar & Karimi, 2010; Wither, 1988). Studies
that specifically used mathematics course grades (not overall GPA) as a mea-
sure of mathematics performance were also eligible because mathematics course
grades often require multiple formal assessments of students’ mathematics per-
formance and represent their cumulative performance. All mathematics mea-
sures (e.g., standardized, nonstandardized, commercial, and researcher-developed)
that tap one of the following skills were eligible: number sense (e.g., counting,
quantity comparison, number magnitudes), calculations (i.e., addition, subtrac-
tion, multiplication, and division), word problem solving, geometry (e.g., shape,
size, and relative position of two- and three-dimensional figures, spatial rela-
tionships), measurement (e.g., conversion of measurements), and algebra (e.g.,
tasks involved in formal algebra, such as manipulating variables, expressions,
and inequalities). Measures that assess multiple skills and reported a composite
score were coded as comprehensive.
Third, studies had to report at least one direct bivariate correlation (r; not
partial correlation) between any measures of MA and any measures of mathe-
matics performance, or the percentage of variance (R2) in mathematics perfor-
mance accounted for by MA only. The measures of MA and mathematics
performance used to calculate the correlation could be assessed at any time
points: concurrent (i.e., both measures assessed at the same/within 2-month
time periods), longitudinal: MP → MA (i.e., MA taken at more than 3 months
later than the time point mathematics performance was assessed), longitudinal:
MA → MP (i.e., MA assessed at more than 3 months prior to the time point
mathematics performance was assessed). In the case of intervention studies, for
experimental groups, correlations only at pretest were eligible for the meta-
analysis because interventions were designed to alter MA or mathematics per-
formance. Correlations at both pretest and posttest from control groups were
eligible. Intervention studies that reported correlations but did not specify
whether they were pretest or posttest correlations were excluded (e.g., B. Y.
Lee, 1991; Mevarech, Silber, & Fine, 1991).
Coding and Interrater Reliability
A codebook was created in an Excel database. The code book included pub-
lication type, sample size, participant characteristics, school type, grades, MA
measures, mathematics performance measures, assessment time (concurrent,
longitudinal: MP → MA, longitudinal: MA → MP), effects on student grades,
and correlations. Specifically, for publication type, we coded as peer-reviewed
manuscripts and others (dissertation, report, and chapter); we coded grade
level as primary (below 5th grade) or secondary (5th–12th grades). When stud-
ies included a mix of primary and secondary grades, we determined whether
471
Namkung et al.
they should be coded as primary or secondary by examining the sample size for
each grade level. For temporal relations, we coded whether the correlation
reported between MA and mathematics performance was concurrent, longitu-
dinal: MP → MA, or longitudinal: MA → MP. When studies did not specify
when the measures were administered, we used our best judgement to code the
studies. For dimensions of MA, we coded MA measures as tapping cognitive,
affective, both, or mixed/unspecified dimensions. For mathematics perfor-
mance, we created a dummy code for foundational (e.g., number sense and
computations) versus advanced mathematics domains (e.g., algebra, measure-
ment, geometry) to examine the effects of difficulty of mathematical tasks. For
types of mathematical tasks, mathematics performance measures that affected
students’ grades (e.g., GPA, course grade, final exam) were coded affecting
school grades. All other measures were coded as not affecting school grades
regardless of the types of measures used in the study (e.g., researcher-devel-
oped vs. commercial).
The reliability of coding was established at the start of coding by indepen-
dently coding several studies and verifying the coding. When variables were not
reported in the study, they were coded as “not reported.” The first and third authors
coded all studies included in this meta-analysis independently. The mean interra-
ter agreement across the total variables was .95, which ranged from .93 to 1.0
across the variables. Any discrepancies between the coders were solved through
discussions with reference to the original articles.
Analysis
Effect Sizes and Nesting
Pearson’s r, the correlation between MA and mathematics performance, was
used as a measure of effect size. Studies could contribute multiple effect sizes as
long as the sample for each effect size was independent. For example, all effect
sizes from the studies that reported separate effect sizes for different measures of
mathematics performance (e.g., Bennett, 1982; Cargnelutti et al., 2017b; Ferla,
Valcke, & Cai, 2009) and grade level (e.g., Carey, Devine, Hill, & Szücs, 2017;
Chiu & Henry, 1990; Gierl & Bisanz, 1995) were eligible.
We accounted for statistical dependencies of multiple effect sizes from the
same sample (i.e., effect sizes nested within samples) by using the random-effects
robust standard error estimation (Hedges, Tipton, & Johnson, 2010). This corrects
the standard errors to take into account the correlations between effect sizes from
the same sample. The robust standard error estimation requires that an estimate of
the mean correlation (ρ) between all pairs of effect sizes within a cluster be esti-
mated for calculating the between-study sampling variance estimate, τ2. In all
analyses, we estimated τ2 with ρ = .80. Sensitivity analyses showed that the find-
ings were robust across different reasonable estimates of ρ.
We converted the correlation coefficients to Fisher’s z scale based on
Borenstein, Hedges, Higgins, and Rothstein’s (2005) recommendations. The
results, such as the summary effect and confidence intervals, were converted
back to correlation coefficients for ease of interpretation. In addition, we used
a random-effects model as we hypothesized that MA research reports a distri-
bution of correlation coefficients with significant between-studies variance,
472
rather than estimating one true correlation (Lipsey & Wilson, 2001). Weighted,
random-effects metaregression models using Hedges et al.’s (2010) correc-
tions were run with ROBUMETA in Stata (Hedberg, 2011) to summarize cor-
relation coefficients and to examine potential moderators.
We first estimated the overall weighted mean correlation between MA and
mathematics performance. We then estimated the overall weighted mean cor-
relation between MA and mathematics performance each subcategory: grades
(primary and secondary), temporal relations (concurrent, longitudinal: MP →
MA, longitudinal: MA → MP), MA dimensions (cognitive, affective, both, and
mixed), types of mathematics skills (foundational and advanced), and per-
ceived importance (important and unimportant). Metaregression analyses were
used to examine moderating effects of dimensions of MA measures, types of
mathematics skills, perceived importance, grade level, and temporal relations.
Publication type was also included in the metaregression model as a covariate.
For the moderation analysis, each moderator was examined with other modera-
tors controlled in one metaregression model. For moderators that were dichoto-
mous (e.g., grade level: primary vs. secondary), we entered them directly into
the metaregression model. For moderators with more than two categories (i.e.,
MA dimensions), we created several sets of dummy coded variables to exam-
ine the comparisons among categories (Cohen, Cohen, West, & Aiken, 2013).
For the analysis on the effect of working memory on the relation between
MA and mathematics performance, there were nine studies that provided cor-
relation tables to calculate 38 correlations on MA and mathematics perfor-
mance, partialling out working memory. Before we examined the partial
correlations, we synthesized the correlations between mathematics perfor-
mance and working memory, mathematics performance and MA, and working
memory and MA. Results indicated that the correlation between mathematics
performance and working memory was r = .31, 95% confidence interval [CI;
.21, .40]; mathematics performance and MA was r = −.23, 95% CI [−.30,
−.15]; and working memory and MA was r = −.08, 95% CI [−.18, .02]. As
represented by the insignificant overall correlation between working memory
and MA, despite our hypothesis, working memory was not found to be related
to MA. Therefore, we refrained from further analyzing the partial correlations
between mathematics performance and MA, partialling working memory.
However, we discuss potential reasons for our null findings below.
Publication Bias
We examined potential publication bias, which refers to the problem of selec-
tive publication, in which the decision to publish a study is influenced by its
results. We used a moderation analysis and Egger, Smith, Schneider, and Minder’s
test (1997). Moderator analyses with publication type as a moderator did not indi-
cate potential publication bias, p = .56. We also did not find a significant publica-
tion bias based on Egger et al.’s (1997) publication bias statistics. That is, the
standard errors of correlations did not significantly predict correlations among
studies with ROBUMETA, p = .94. Therefore, the original data set was used in
all reported analyses.
473
Table 2
Relation between MA and mathematics performance
No. of
Subcategory correlations r 95% CI τ2
Overall average correlation 478 −.34* [−.37, −.31] .03
Grade level
1. Primary (below 5th grade) 206 −.27* [−.31, −.23] .02
2. Secondary (5th-12th grade) 272 −.36* [−.40, −.32] .03
Temporal relations
1. Concurrent 312 −.32* [−.36, −.28] .03
2. Longitudinal: MP → MA 26 −.37* [−.44, −.31] .007
3. Longitudinal: MA → MP 139 −.37* [−.45, −.29] .04
Dimensions of MA
1. Cognitive 9 −.32* [−.52, −.08] .09
2. Affective 338 −.31* [−.36, −.27] .03
3. Both 110 −.39* [−.43, −.35] .03
4. Mixed 21 −.29* [−.37, −.22] .01
Difficulty of mathematics skills
1. Foundational 97 −.20* [−.26, −.14] .01
2. advanced 381 −.35* [−.38, −.31] .03
Effects on grade
1. Effects on grade 105 −.38* [−.43, −.34] .02
2. No effects on grade 373 −.31* [−.35, −.27] .03
Note. MA = mathematics anxiety; MP = mathematics performance; CI = confidence interval.

Overall average correlation and all subcategory analyses were run separately. For the convenience of
presentation, we combined all results in the table.
*p < .001.
Results
The Relation Between MA and Mathematics Performance
Table 2 shows the average correlations across all studies and for each subcat-
egory. A total of 478 effect sizes with 172 independent samples from 131 studies
were obtained for the average correlation between MA and mathematics perfor-
mance. Overall, MA and mathematics performance had a significant negative cor-
relation, r = −.34, 95% CI [−.37, −.31]. Then, we examined the average
correlations for subcategories.
The average correlations between MA and mathematics performance were sig-
nificant for both primary grades, r = −.27, 95% CI [−.31, −.23], and secondary
grades, r = −.36, 95% CI [−.40, −.32]. For temporal relations, the average corre-
lations for concurrent and longitudinal studies were all significant. The average
concurrent correlation was r = −.32, 95% CI [−.36, −.28], and the average longi-
tudinal: MP → MA, correlation was r = −.37, 95% CI [−.44, −.31]. The average
correlation for longitudinal: MA → MP was r = −.37, 95% CI [−.45, −.29]. The
474
average correlation between MA and mathematics for cognitive MA dimension
was r = −.32, 95% CI [−.52, −.08]; for affective MA measures was r = −.31, 95%
CI [−.36, −.27]; for MA measures tapping both affective and cognitive dimen-
sions was r = −.39, 95% CI [−.43, −.35]; for mixed MA was r = −.29, 95% CI
[−.37, −.22]. The average correlation between MA and mathematics for founda-
tional mathematics skills was r = −.20, 95% CI [−.26, −.14], and for advanced
mathematics skills was r = −.35, 95% CI [−.38, −.31]. The average correlation
between MA and mathematics measures that affected student grades in mathemat-
ics was r = −.38, 95% CI [−.43, −.34], and for mathematics measures that had no
effects on student grades was r = −.31, 95% CI [−.35, −.27].
Moderating Effects
Next, we ran the moderation analyses by putting all moderators of interests
simultaneously in a metaregression model. As Table 3 shows, after controlling
for publication type, grade level, temporal relations, difficulty of mathematical
tasks, and effects on grade, MA measures tapping both cognitive and affective
dimensions were more strongly (negatively) related to mathematics perfor-
mance than were affective only or mixed/unspecified MA dimensions, β =
−.07/.12, ps < .05, τ2 =.02. No significant differences were found among the
relations between mathematics performance and other dimensions MA (e.g.,
cognitive vs. affective). After controlling for all other variables in the model,
MA was more strongly (negatively) related to mathematics performance when
the mathematical measure that affected school grades, β = .08, p =.02, τ2 =.02.
In addition, advanced skills had a significantly stronger negative relation to
mathematics performance compared to foundational skills controlling for all
other variables in the model, β = −.08, p =.03, τ2 =.02. There were no signifi-
cant moderation effects of grade level, β = −.03, p =.31, τ2 =.02, or temporal
relations, β = .03/.02/.01, ps >.05, τ2 =.02, after controlling for all other vari-
ables in the model.
Discussion
The purpose of the present meta-analysis was to examine the relation between
MA and mathematics performance among school-aged students and to identify
potential moderators and underlying mechanisms of such relation, including
grade level, temporal relations, difficulty of mathematical tasks, dimensions of
MA measures, and perceived importance. We found that overall, there was a mod-
erate, negative relation between MA and mathematics performance (r = −.34).
This is in line with previous meta-analysis studies, in which the correlation
between MA and mathematic performance for secondary students ranged from
−.27 to −.34 (Hembree, 1990; Ma, 1999). We also found that this relation was
significantly affected by dimensions of MA, difficulty of mathematics perfor-
mance, and perceived importance of mathematics performance measures. That is,
MA assessed with both cognitive and affective dimensions showed a stronger
negative correlation with mathematics performance compared to MA assessed
with either affective dimension only or mixed/unspecified dimension. Advanced
mathematics domains that require multistep processes showed a stronger negative
correlation to MA compared to foundational mathematics domains. Mathematics
475
Table 3
Metaregression of the moderation analysis on the relation between MA and mathematics
performance
Moderator β SE 95% CI p
Publication type
Peer-reviewed vs. others .06 .07 [−.09, .21] .43
Grade level
Secondary vs. primary −.03 .03 [−.10, .03] .31
Temporal relations
Longitudinal: MP → MA vs. Concurrent .03 .04 [−.05, .11] .44
Longitudinal: MA → MP vs. Concurrent .02 .03 [−.05, .08] .58
Longitudinal: MP → MA vs. .01 .04 [−.07, .10] .72
Longitudinal: MA → MP
Dimensions of MA
Cognitive vs. Affective −.02 .11 [−.29, .26] .87
Both vs. Affective −.07 .03 [−.13, −.002] .04
Mixed vs. Affective .06 .04 [−.02, .13] .16
Both vs. Cognitive −.05 .11 [−.33, .22] .66
Mixed vs. Cognitive .07 .12 [−.20, .34] .55
Mixed vs. Both .12 .04 [.04, .20] .01
Difficulty of mathematical tasks
Foundational vs. Advanced −.08 .03 [−.15, −.01] .03
Effects on grade
Effects on grade vs. No effects on grade .08 .03 [.02, .14] .02
Note. MA = mathematics anxiety; MP = mathematics performance; CI = confidence interval. All

moderators were entered in one model. Several models were run for thorough subgroup comparisons
for MA with more than 2 categories. For the convenience of presentation, subgroup comparisons
within Temporal Relations and Dimensions of MA are all listed in the table. Between-study
sampling variance (τ2) for this model is .02.
measures that affect student grades had a stronger negative correlation to MA than
to other measures that did not affect student grades.
Three major theories regarding the relation between MA and mathematics per-
formance guided our meta-analysis: (a) deficit theory, in which poor mathematics
performance leads to subsequent MA; (b) cognitive interference theory, in which
MA subsequently affects mathematics performance during pre-processing, pro-
cessing, and retrieval of information; and (c) reciprocal theory, in which MA and
mathematics performance have a bidirectional relation, affecting one another in a
vicious cycle. In the following, we discuss our findings for each theory and their
implications in detail.
Deficit Theory
One aspect related to the deficit theory is that elementary students who have
not had enough negative experience (poor mathematics performance) have low to
476
minimal MA. This lack of variance in MA would lead to a weaker or no correla-
tion between MA and mathematics performance among young children while the
culminating repeated negative experience among secondary children leads to a
stronger relation between MA and mathematics performance. Contrary to this
claim, our meta-analysis indicated that primary and secondary students have a
similar strength of relation regarding MA and mathematics performance after
controlling for other variables. This finding suggests that MA may go hand in
hand with mathematics performance starting as early as early childhood.
At the same time, our synthesis calls for more research targeting younger stu-
dents. As reflected on the paucity of research for younger children discussed ear-
lier, among 37 studies that targeted primary grades (below 5th grade) in the
present meta-analysis, only seven studies were published before 1999, and 30
studies were published after 2005, with most studies published between 2014 and
2018. Given the short history of research on the relation between MA and math-
ematics performance for young children, combined with our finding that primary
children show a similar negative relation between MA and mathematics perfor-
mance, more research is needed on the prevalence of MA, relation between MA
and mathematics performance, and factors that contribute to such relation among
young children. On the other hand, our finding has important implications for
interventions. Prior studies have suggested that students in upper elementary
grades should be screened and treated for MA (e.g., Ma, 1999). Our finding sug-
gests that screening and treating for MA should start much earlier, in lower ele-
mentary grades, so that students with MA can be identified early and receive early
interventions, before experiencing the detrimental effects of MA.
However, we note that whereas grade level was one aspect related to the defi-
cit theory, it does not provide a direct testing of the causal relation depicted by
the deficit theory. Studies on students with mathematics learning difficulties and
longitudinal studies would provide more direct evidence on the deficit theory
although we did not have enough studies to synthesize the evidence on either
end. Nonetheless, we examined the longitudinal studies included in the review
to gain more direct insight by parsing out the relations between prior MA and
mathematics performance across different time points. Among 14 longitudinal
studies in the current meta-analysis, only four studies adopted path or structural
equation (SEM) models on the relation between mathematics performance and
MA across two different time points (Casey, Nuttall, & Pezaris, 1997; Gunderson,
Park, Maloney, Beilock, & Levine, 2018; Kyttälä & Björn, 2010; Pekrun,
Lichtenfeld, Marsh, Murayama, & Goetz, 2017). Specifically, Casey et al.
(1997) investigated whether MA at Time 1 predicted mathematics performance
at Time 2; Kyttälä and Björn (2010) investigated whether mathematics perfor-
mance at Time 1 predicted MA at Time 2 and whether MA at Time 2 predicted
mathematics performance at Time 3; both Gunderson et al. (2018) and Pekrun
et al. (2017) used cross-lagged path models to examined whether mathematics
performance and MA at Time 1 predicted math performance and math anxiety
at Time 2. All these path/SEM models included different covariates in their
models (e.g., grade level, gender, intelligence, and socioeconomic status),
which does not allow for direct comparisons across the studies. However, the
overall findings based on the path coefficients of these models suggested a
477
Namkung et al.
longitudinal correlation between mathematics performance and MA, partially
supporting the deficit theory. That is, prior mathematics performance appears to
affect subsequent MA.
Cognitive Interference Theory
The cognitive interference theory suggests that MA leads to poor mathematics
performance. One key mechanism of this one-way relation is that MA consumes
(or even depletes) working memory so that students would not have sufficient
working memory for mathematics tasks, leading to poor mathematics perfor-
mance (Ashcraft & Kirk, 2001; Eysenck & Calvo, 1992; H. Miller & Bichsel,
2004). Although we expected working memory to (at least) partially explain the
relation between MA and mathematics performance, we did not find working
memory to be related to MA in the current meta-analysis. Thus, our attempt to use
partial correlations between MA and mathematics partialling out working mem-
ory in the current study failed to provide clear/strong evidence for the cognitive
interference theory.
However, we think this null finding may highlight some important issues
regarding the role of working memory and the effects of working memory mea-
sures for the relation between MA and mathematics performance. First, the non-
significant relation between working memory and MA may be partly due to the
small number of studies (we only had nine studies that included relations between
working memory and MA). Alternatively, the nonsignificant finding may be
related to the nature of working memory tasks. Individual differences in working
memory measured during a working memory task may not necessarily be corre-
lated with MA because MA should not be induced during a working memory task
that is not related to mathematics. Specifically, research shows that how MA com-
promises working memory may be more subtle than simply saying that MA con-
sumes the resources of the working memory system. For example, Ashcraft and
Kirk (2001) indicated that verbal working memory was not correlated to MA
whereas numerical working memory was significantly correlated to MA. This
finding, together with our null finding on the relation between working memory
and MA, may pose some interesting supplemental hypotheses to the cognitive
interference theory. That is, working memory may be domain-specific in the rela-
tion between MA and mathematics performance. Only working memory tasks
that specifically involve numerical processing may arouse MA, thereby draining
working memory resources.
Moreover, differences in the levels of working memory may influence the rela-
tion between working memory and MA. Whereas some studies found that stu-
dents with MA who also have low working memory are more susceptible to poor
mathematics performance (Ashcraft & Kirk, 2001; H. Miller & Bichsel, 2004),
others suggest that students with MA who have high working memory are more
susceptible to poorer mathematics performance (Beilock & Carr, 2005; Beilock &
DeCaro, 2007; Ramirez et al., 2013). Thus, the interaction between MA and work-
ing memory on the relation between MA and mathematics performance may be
another potentially interesting hypothesis added to the cognitive interference the-
ory. Unfortunately, in the current study, we did not have sufficient number of
reviewed studies tapping the relation between numerical working memory (n = 4)
478
and MA, or reporting the relations between MA and mathematics performance
based on participants with high working memory versus those with low working
memory (n = 3). Thus, future studies are needed to further explore the domain-
specificity and MA-working memory interaction hypotheses, and how they affect
the relation between MA and mathematics performance.
On a related note, previous studies suggest the importance of considering cog-
nition, such as working memory and intelligence, in education research and prac-
tice (e.g., Ceci & Williams, 1997; Peng, Barnes, et al., 2018; Peng, Wang, Wang,
& Lin, 2018; Raghubar, Barnes, & Hecht, 2010). However, the role of cognition
in academic performance may vary depending on other covariates considered
simultaneously. For example, recent research on the role of cognition versus
domain-specific skills (e.g., foundational word reading and numerical skills) in
academic performance often suggests that domain-specific skills are more proxi-
mal variables compared to cognition for academic achievement (i.e., domain-
specific skills serve as strong mediators; e.g., Cromley, Snyder-Hogan, &
Luciw-Dubas, 2010; Fuchs et al., 2010; Geary, 2011; Passolunghi & Lanfranchi,
2012; Peng, Barnes, et al., 2018). In contrast, when cognition was paired with
(domain-specific) social/emotional factors, such as MA in the current study and
SES/self-efficacy/personality attributes in other studies for academic performance
(or academic related outcomes; e.g., Gottfredson, 2004; Sackett, Kuncel, Arneson,
Cooper, & Waters, 2009; Sanders, Lubinski, & Benbow, 1995), cognition was
found to be more important than domain-specific social/emotional factors. Future
studies may need to consider other important cognitive variables, important
domain-specific skills, and social/emotional factors to explore the relative impor-
tance of cognition for academic performance.
Although we did not find a significant relation between working memory and
mathematics performance in our meta-analysis and, therefore, could not provide
direct evidence on the mediation role of working memory, our findings on other
moderators indeed provide some indirect evidence for the cognitive interference
theory. Specifically, in line with our hypothesis, foundational mathematics skills
showed a weaker correlation to MA than advanced mathematics skills, and this
relation held in our moderation analysis even after controlling for all other vari-
ables. We think different types of mathematics skills may require different degrees
of cognitive load, with more difficult mathematics problems requiring greater
cognitive resources, such as working memory. For example, a basic arithmetic
calculation, such as 3 + 5, may be solved via direct retrieval from long-term
memory, which does not require many cognitive resources. Even when students
use counting strategies to find the answer, the cognitive resource required in com-
pleting the basic arithmetic addition is far less than that of a procedural calcula-
tion problem, such as 24 + 18. In a more complex procedural calculation problem,
one would have to keep track of place value, regrouping, and sums for each place
value while simultaneously monitoring for errors. These multistep processes tax
working memory.
The effects of varying levels of mathematics task difficulty are also in line with
previous studies. For example, Ashcraft and colleagues found that college stu-
dents’ performance on basic arithmetic calculation is not affected by MA whereas
their performance on more complex procedural calculation is negatively affected
479
Namkung et al.
by MA (Ashcraft & Faust, 1994; Ashcraft & Moore, 1994). Ashcraft and Moore
(1994) suggested that increasing difficulty of the mathematics problems creates
additional load on working memory such that students would have to use their
limited working memory recourses for increased demand on working memory for
solving difficult, cognitively taxing problems, in addition to dealing with their
MA. This would overload working memory and leads to poorer performance.
The cognitive interference theory may also help explain the mechanism under-
lying our finding that the relation between MA and mathematics performance was
stronger when mathematics performance measures affected student grades. In
prior studies, other related factors, such as timed tests and high-stakes tests, have
been identified to affect MA and mathematics performance (Kellogg et al., 1999).
Salamé (1984) identified time pressure as one possible source of worry. That is,
students would be preoccupied with worry that there is insufficient time to com-
plete a task. Based on this framework, Kellogg et al. (1999) suggested that stu-
dents with MA would be preoccupied with worry in a timed condition, and this
would contribute to existing worry elicited by MA. This, in turn, may overload
limited working memory capacity. Likewise, it is possible that students’ worry
about their grades may have made additional contribution to the negative cogni-
tion related to MA, compromising already limited working memory capacity and
thereby leading to poorer mathematics performance.
Taken together, our findings suggest that much attention needs to be given to
address the cognitive mechanism underlying MA and mathematics performance.
Our findings also have important implications for interventions. Interventions
have focused on behavioral strategies, such as systematic desensitization, relax-
ation training, and modeling, to primarily reduce affective anxiety, which has
successfully resulted in both reduced MA and increased mathematics perfor-
mance (Hembree, 1990; Ho et al., 2000). Such intervention efforts should also
address cognitive components as potential intervention targets as inappropriate
attention to the cognitive components of MA, including intrusive thought,
worry, preoccupation with performance evaluation, may be the key to the under-
lying mechanism.
Bidirectional Theory
The bidirectional theory suggests that MA and mathematics performance
mutually influence each other. In this study, we examined this hypothesis with
the moderation analysis on the temporal relations. We found similar strengths of
relations across concurrent and both types of longitudinal relations of MA and
mathematics performance, which appears to provide support for the bidirec-
tional theory that the MA and mathematics performance relation appears to be
bidirectional. That is, our finding suggests that the negative relation between
MA and mathematics performance may be developmentally continuous
(Cargnelutti et al., 2017a, 2017b; Luo, Hogan, et al., 2014), and this relation
may be long-lasting, negatively affecting each other in a vicious cycle. Although
we cannot draw specific conclusions about whether MA first leads to poor
mathematics performance, or vice versa, the bidirectional evidence on this rela-
tion and the insignificant difference on this relation between primary and sec-
ondary grades suggest that future studies on the causal relations between MA
480
and mathematics may need to focus on very young children at the beginning of
their formal mathematics education.
The bidirectional evidence has an important implication for intervention tar-
gets. That is, intervention efforts should be devoted to both reducing MA and
remediating mathematics skills deficits together, rather than focusing on one
without the other for students with MA. This combined effort may be the key to
improving both MA and mathematics performance. Toward that end, mathematics
instruction and interventions should consider incorporating effective strategies to
reduce MA (e.g., writing about emotions in Park, Ramirez, & Beilock, 2014),
which is currently lacking in the literature.
Dimensions of MA
We found the relation between MA and mathematics performance was stronger
when MA measures assessed both cognitive and affective dimensions whereas
MA assessed with mixed constructs, such as confidence and dislike, or unspeci-
fied measures show the weakest relation to mathematics performance. This find-
ing is in line with previous studies that found that two distinct dimensions of MA,
cognition and affect, best represent the MA construct (Ho et al., 2000; Wigfield &
Meece, 1988). However, our finding is in contrast to some studies, in which the
affective dimension of MA was found to be more strongly and consistently cor-
related with mathematics performance compared to the cognitive dimension of
MA (Ho et al., 2000; Wigfield & Meece, 1988).
Although we cannot draw conclusions about whether the affective- or cogni-
tive-only dimension shows a stronger relation to mathematics performance as we
did not find a significant difference between those two dimensions, in the test
anxiety literature, negative cognition has been found to be more consistently
related to test performance whereas the affective dimension showed a weaker and
less consistent correlation to test performance (e.g., Deffenbacher, 1986; Doctor
& Altman, 1969; Liebert & Morris, 1967; Morris & Liebert, 1970; Sharma & Rao,
1983). Thus, we think the nonsignificant finding between the cognitive- and
affective-only dimensions may be due to the limited number of studies that
assessed the cognitive dimension of MA. In fact, there were only eight studies that
included the cognitive dimension whereas 76 studies assessed the affective dimen-
sion. This reflects the fact that MA is most often defined as affective only in cur-
rent literature, and most MA measures exclusively target the affective dimension
as shown in Table 1, despite multiple evidence we found for the cognitive mecha-
nism that may underlie the MA and mathematics performance relation.
Limitations
We note that our findings should be interpreted with caution as several limi-
tations exist. First, in terms of examining the longitudinal relation between
mathematics performance and MA, cross-lagged correlations are biased under
many conditions to reach an accurate conclusion on the underlying causal links
between mathematics performance and MA. As discussed, we were unable to
synthesize the coefficients based path or SEM models due to the limited number
of studies reporting those statistics (n = 4) in the current meta-analysis. Future
studies using meta-SEM based on sufficient data points (e.g., Cheung, 2015)
481
Namkung et al.
may further validate the causal pattern between mathematics performance and
MA. Second, as discussed earlier, we could not directly assess the deficit theory
but assessed one related aspect using grade level as a proxy. Third, some of our
analyses may be underpowered due to the small number of studies and effect
sizes, such as cognitive versus affective dimensions of MA. Similarly, we could
not include some other potentially important moderators, such as effects of
timed versus untimed mathematics measures, due to the limited number of stud-
ies. We also note that there may be alternative ways to examine the dimension-
ality of MA. For example, MA may be defined based on the types of activities,
such as MA about performing mathematical calculations, MA about mathemat-
ics testing, and MA about performing mathematics and being evaluated in class-
room situations (e.g., Chiu & Henry, 1990; Hopko, 2003; Lukowski et al.,
2019). Although we did not have enough studies that reported separate correla-
tions based on the different types of activities, further study is warranted to
examine whether the MA and mathematics achievement relation differs by spe-
cific mathematics-related situations.
Conclusion
With all those limitations in mind, the current meta-analysis provided an
updated synthesis on the relation between MA and mathematics performance.
First, MA and mathematics performance are negatively related across primary
and secondary grades. Second, our findings partially support the deficit theory
(e.g., grade level did not moderate the relation between MA and mathematics
performance, but prior mathematics performance predicted subsequent MA),
indirectly supported the cognitive interference theory (e.g., the relation between
MA and mathematics performance tended to be stronger among more difficult
mathematics tasks and mathematics tasks that affect student grades), and sup-
ported the bidirectional theory (e.g., the relation between MA and mathematics
performance is robust concurrently and longitudinally). Third, we proposed
that future studies should consider working memory domain specificity, the
interaction between working memory and MA, and mathematics disabilities
status to further test the cognitive interference theory and deficit theory. With
all being said, our data are correlational in nature. Future experimental studies
are needed to further validate the causal relation between MA and mathematics
performance.
ORCID iD
Jessica M. Namkung https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1626-9085
References
References marked with an asterisk indicate studies included in the meta-analysis.
Aarnos, E., & Perkkilä, P. (2012). Early signs of mathematics anxiety? Procedia-Social
and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 1495–1499. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.328
*Abu-Hilal, M. M. (2000). A structural model for predicting mathematics achieve-
ment: Its relation with anxiety and self-concept in mathematics. Psychological
Reports, 86, 835–847. doi:10.2466%2Fpr0.2000.86.3.835
482
*Ahmed, W., Minnaert, A., van der Werf, G., & Kuyper, H. (2010). Perceived social
support and early adolescents’ achievement: The mediational roles of motivational
beliefs and emotions. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39, 36–46. doi:10.1007/
s10964-008-9367-7
Aiken, L. R., Jr. (1976). Update on attitudes and other affective variables in learning
mathematics. Review of Educational Research, 46, 293–311. doi:10.3102
%2F00346543046002293
Ashcraft, M. H., & Faust, M. W. (1994). Mathematics anxiety and mental arithmetic
performance: An exploratory investigation. Cognition and Emotion, 8, 97–125.
doi:10.1080/02699939408408931
Ashcraft, M. H., & Kirk, E. P. (2001). The relationships among working memory, math
anxiety, and performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 224–
237. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.130.2.224
Ashcraft, M. H., Kirk, E. P., & Hopko, D. (1998). On the cognitive consequences of
mathematics anxiety. In C. Donlan (Ed.), Studies in developmental psychology. The
development of mathematical skills (pp. 175–196). Hove, England: Psychology
Press/Taylor & Francis.
Ashcraft, M. H., & Krause, J. A. (2007). Working memory, math performance, and math
anxiety. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 243–248. doi:10.3758%2FBF03194059
Ashcraft, M. H., & Moore, A. M. (2009). Mathematics anxiety and the affective drop
in performance. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 27, 197–205. doi:10.11
77%2F0734282908330580
*Awofala, A. O. (2014). Examining personalization of instruction, attitudes toward and
achievement in mathematics word problems among Nigerian senior secondary
school students. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and
Technology, 2, 273–288. Retrieved from http://dergipark.gov.tr/ijemst/
issue/8006/105108
Baddeley, A., Logie, R., Bressi, S., Sala, S. D., & Spinnler, H. (1986). Dementia and
working memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 38,
603–618. doi:10.1080%2F14640748608401616
*Bai, H. (2011). Cross-validating a bidimensional mathematics anxiety scale.
Assessment, 18, 115–122. doi:10.1177%2F1073191110364312
*Baya’a, N. F. (1990). Mathematics anxiety, mathematics achievement, gender, and
socio-economic status among Arab secondary students in Israel. International
Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 21, 319–324.
doi:10.1080/0020739900210221
*Beasley, T. M., Long, J. D., & Natali, M. (2001). A confirmatory factor analysis of the
mathematics anxiety scale for children. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling
and Development, 34, 14–26.
Beilock, S. L., & Carr, T. H. (2005). When high–powered people fail: Working memory
and “choking under pressure” in math. Psychological Science, 16, 101–105.
doi:10.1111%2Fj.0956–7976.2005.00789.x
Beilock, S. L., & DeCaro, M. S. (2007). From poor performance to success under
stress: Working memory, strategy selection, and mathematical problem solving
under pressure. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33, 983–998. doi:10.1037/0278–
7393.33.6.983
*Bennett, B. K. (1982). The relationship between mathematics anxiety and number
pattern recognition in sixth grade students (Doctoral dissertation). The American
University, Washington, DC.
483
Namkung et al.
Berman, L. (1985). The relation between fear of success, field–dependence and math
anxiety to mathematics achievement in bright boys: A theoretical model (Doctoral
dissertation). New York University, New York.
*Birgin, O., Baloğlu, M., Çatlıoğlu, H., & Gürbüz, R. (2010). An investigation of
mathematics anxiety among sixth through eighth grade students in Turkey. Learning
and Individual Differences, 20, 654–658. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2010.04.006
Bong, M. (2009). Age-related differences in achievement goal differentiation. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 101, 879–896. doi:0.1037/a0015945
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J., & Rothstein, H. (2005). Comprehensive
meta-analysis 2.0. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Biostat.
*Bosmans, G., & De Smedt, B. (2015). Insecure attachment is associated with math
anxiety in middle childhood. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1596–1596. doi:10.3389/
fpsyg.2015.01596
*Brassell, A., Petry, S., & Brooks, D. M. (1980). Ability grouping, mathematics
achievement, and pupil attitudes toward mathematics. Journal for Research in
Mathematics Education, 11, 22–28.
*Carey, E., Devine, A., Hill, F., & Szűcs, D. (2017). Differentiating anxiety forms and
their role in academic performance from primary to secondary school. PloS One, 12.
doi:10.137/journal.pone.0174418
Carey, E., Hill, F., Devine, A., & Szücs, D. (2016). The chicken or the egg? The direc-
tion of the relationship between mathematics anxiety and mathematics performance.
Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1987–1987. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01987
*Cargnelutti, E., Tomasetto, C., & Passolunghi, M. C. (2017a). How is anxiety
related to math performance in young students? A longitudinal study of grade 2 to
grade 3 children. Cognition and Emotion, 31, 755–764. doi:10.1080/02699931.2
016.1147421
*Cargnelutti, E., Tomasetto, C., & Passolunghi, M. C. (2017b). The interplay between
affective and cognitive factors in shaping early proficiency in mathematics. Trends
in Neuroscience and Education, 8, 28–36. doi:10.1016/j.tine.2017.10.002
*Casad, B. J., Hale, P., & Wachs, F. L. (2015). Parent-child math anxiety and math-
gender stereotypes predict adolescents’ math education outcomes. Frontiers in
Psychology, 6, 1–21. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01597
*Casey, M. B., Nuttall, R. L., & Pezaris, E. (1997). Mediators of gender differences in
mathematics college entrance test scores: A comparison of spatial skills with inter-
nalized beliefs and anxieties. Developmental Psychology, 33, 669–680.
doi:10.1037/0012–1649.33.4.669
*Catapano, M. (2013). Tenth-grade high school students’ mathematical self–efficacy,
mathematics anxiety, attitudes toward mathematics, and performance on the New
York State Integrated Algebra Regents Examination (Doctoral dissertation).
Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3572381)
*Caviola, S., Primi, C., Chiesi, F., & Mammarella, I. C. (2017). Psychometric proper-
ties of the Abbreviated Math Anxiety Scale (AMAS) in Italian primary school chil-
dren. Learning and Individual Differences, 55, 174–182. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016%2Fj.lindif.2017.03.006
Ceci, S. J., & Williams, W. M. (1997). Schooling, intelligence, and income. American
Psychologist, 52, 1051–1058. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.52.10.1051
*Cheema, J. R., & Sheridan, K. (2015). Time spent on homework, mathematics anxiety
and mathematics achievement: Evidence from a US sample. Issues in Educational
Research, 25, 246–259.
484
Cheung, M. W. L. (2015). Meta-analysis: A structural equation modeling approach.
New York: NY: John Wiley.
*Ching, B. H. H. (2017). Mathematics anxiety and working memory: Longitudinal
associations with mathematical performance in Chinese children. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 51, 99–113. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2017.06.006
*Chiu, L. H., & Henry, L. L. (1990). Development and validation of the Mathematics
Anxiety Scale for Children. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and
Development, 23, 121–127.
*Ciftci, S. K. (2015). Effects of secondary school students’ perceptions of mathematics
education quality on mathematics anxiety and achievement. Educational Sciences:
Theory and Practice, 15, 1487–1501. doi:10.12738/estp.2015.6.2829
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2013). Applied multiple regression/
correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York, NY: Routledge.
Cromley, J. G., Snyder–Hogan, L. E., & Luciw–Dubas, U. A. (2010). Reading compre-
hension of scientific text: A domain–specific test of the direct and inferential media-
tion model of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102,
687–700.
Deffenbacher, J. L. (1986). Cognitive and physiological components of test anxiety in
real-life exams. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 10, 635–644. doi:10.1007/
BF01173751
*Delaney, R. A. (1981). An anecdotal and historical approach to mathematics
(Doctoral dissertation). New York University, New York.
Deutsch, T., & Tobias, S. (1980, September). Prior achievement, anxiety, and instruc-
tional method. Paper presented at the 88th annual meeting of the American
Psychological Association, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
*Devine, A., Fawcett, K., Szűcs, D., & Dowker, A. (2012). Gender differences in
mathematics anxiety and the relation to mathematics performance while control-
ling for test anxiety. Behavioral and Brain Functions, 8, 1–9. doi:10.1186/1744-
9081-8-33
*Devine, A., Hill, F., Carey, E., & Szűcs, D. (2018). Cognitive and emotional math
problems largely dissociate: Prevalence of developmental dyscalculia and mathe-
matics anxiety. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110, 431–444. doi:10.1037/
edu0000222
*Dlamini, M. S. (1998). The relationship between students’ attitude toward mathemat-
ics and achievement in mathematics in Swaziland (Doctoral dissertation). The Ohio
State University, Columbus.
Doctor, R. M., & Altman, F. (1969). Worry and emotionality as components of test
anxiety: Replication and further data. Psychological Reports, 24, 563–568.
doi:10.2466/pr0.1969.24.2.563
*Donnelly, D. F. (1986). The effect of a high school computer studies course on
achievement and anxiety level in mathematics (Doctoral dissertation), Northern
Arizona University, Flagstaff.
*Eccles, J. S., & Jacobs, J. E. (1986). Social forces shape math attitudes and perfor-
mance. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 11, 367–380.
doi:10.1086/494229
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997). Bias in meta-analysis
detected by a simple, graphical test. British Medical Journal, 315, 629–634.
doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629
485
Namkung et al.
*Engelhard, G. (1990). Math anxiety, mother’s education, and the mathematics perfor-
mance of adolescent boys and girls: Evidence from the United States and Thailand.
Journal of Psychology, 124, 289–298. doi:10.1080/00223980.1990.10543224
*Erturan, S., & Jansen, B. (2015). An investigation of boys’ and girls’ emotional expe-
rience of math, their math performance, and the relation between these variables.
European Journal of Psychology of Education, 30, 421–435. doi:10.1007/s10212-
015-0248-7
Eysenck, M. W., & Calvo, M. G. (1992). Anxiety and performance: The processing effi-
ciency theory. Cognition and Emotion, 6, 409–434. doi:10.1080/02699939208409696
*Federici, R. A., & Skaalvik, E. M. (2014). Students’ perceptions of emotional and
instrumental teacher support: Relations with motivational and emotional responses.
International Education Studies, 7, 21–36. doi:10.5539/ies.v7n1p21
*Ferla, J., Valcke, M., & Cai, Y. (2009). Academic self-efficacy and academic self-
concept: Reconsidering structural relationships. Learning and Individual Differences,
19, 499–505. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2009.05.004
*Frenzel, A. C., Thrash, T. M., Pekrun, R., & Goetz, T. (2007). Achievement emotions
in Germany and China: A cross-cultural validation of the Academic Emotions
Questionnaire-Mathematics. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 38, 302–309.
doi:10.1177%2F0022022107300276
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Compton, D. L., Powell, S. R., Seethaler, P. M., Capizzi, A. M.,
. . . Fletcher, J. M. (2006). The cognitive correlates of third–grade skill in arithmetic,
algorithmic computation, and arithmetic word problems. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 98, 29–43. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.29
Fuchs, L. S., Geary, D. C., Compton, D. L., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., Seethaler, P. M.,
. . . Schatschneider, C. (2010). Do different types of school mathematics develop-
ment depend on different constellations of numerical versus general cognitive abili-
ties? Developmental Psychology, 46, 1731–1746.
*Ganley, C. M., & McGraw, A. L. (2016). The development and validation of a revised
version of the math anxiety scale for young children. Frontiers in Psychology, 7,
1181–1181. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01181
*Gaskill, J. L. (1979). The emotional block in mathematics: A multivariate study
(Doctoral dissertation). University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British
Columbia, Canada. doi:10.14288/1.0055082
Geary, D. C. (2011). Consequences, characteristics, and causes of mathematical learn-
ing disabilities and persistent low achievement in mathematics. Journal of
Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics, 32, 250–263.
*Gierl, M. J., & Bisanz, J. (1995). Anxieties and attitudes related to mathematics in
grades 3 and 6. Journal of Experimental Education, 63, 139–158. doi:10.1080/002
20973.1995.9943818
*Gliner, G. S. (1987). The relationship between mathematics anxiety and achievement
variables. School Science and Mathematics, 87, 81–87. doi:10.1111/j.1949–8594.1987.
tb11679.x
*Goetz, T., Frenzel, A. C., Lüdtke, O., & Hall, N. C. (2010). Between-domain relations
of academic emotions: Does having the same instructor make a difference? Journal
of Experimental Education, 79, 84–101. doi:10.1080/00220970903292967
*Goetz, T., Frenzel, A. C., Pekrun, R., & Hall, N. C. (2006). The domain specificity of
academic emotional experiences. Journal of Experimental Education, 75, 5–29.
doi:10.3200/JEXE.75.1.5-29
486
*Goetz, T., Frenzel, A. C., Pekrun, R., Hall, N. C., & Ludtke, O. (2007). Between-and
within-domain relations of students’ academic emotions. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 99, 715–733. doi:10.1037/0022–0663.99.4.715
*Gogol, K., Brunner, M., Goetz, T., Martin, R., Ugen, S., Keller, U., . . . Preckel, F.
(2014). “My Questionnaire is too long!” The assessments of motivational-affective
constructs with three-item and single-item measures. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 39, 188–205. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.04.002
*Gomez, R., Vance, A., & Watson, S. D. (2016). Structure of the Wechsler Intelligence
Scale for children–fourth edition in a group of children with ADHD. Frontiers in
Psychology, 7, 737–737. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00737
Gottfredson, L. S. (2004). Intelligence: Is it the epidemiologists’ elusive “fundamental
cause” of social class inequalities in health. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 86, 174–199.
*Grays, S. D., Rhymer, K. N., & Swartzmiller, M. D. (2017). Moderating effects of
mathematics anxiety on the effectiveness of explicit timing. Journal of Behavioral
Education, 26, 188–200. doi:10.1007/s10864–016–9251–6
*Green, J. J. (1991). Mathematics anxiety and attitudes towards mathematics at the sec-
ondary level (Doctoral dissertation). University of New England, Biddeford, MN.
*Gunderson, E. A., Park, D., Maloney, E. A., Beilock, S. L., & Levine, S. C. (2018).
Reciprocal relations among motivational frameworks, math anxiety, and math
achievement in early elementary school. Journal of Cognition and Development, 19,
21–46. doi:10.1080/15248372.2017.1421538
*Guven, B., & Cabakcor, B. O. (2013). Factors influencing mathematical problem-
solving achievement of seventh grade Turkish students. Learning and Individual
Differences, 23, 131–137. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2012.10.003
*Hadfield, O. D., Martin, J. V., & Wooden, S. (1992). Mathematics anxiety and learn-
ing style of the Navajo middle school student. School Science and Mathematics, 92,
171–176. doi:10.1111/j.1949–8594.1992.tb12167.x
*Hamid, M. H. S., Shahrill, M., Matzin, R., Mahalle, S., & Mundia, L. (2013). Barriers
to mathematics achievement in Brunei secondary school students: Insights into the
roles of mathematics anxiety, self-esteem, proactive coping, and test stress.
International Education Studies, 6, 1–14. doi:10.5539/ies.v6n11p1
*Harari, R. R., Vukovic, R. K., & Bailey, S. P. (2013). Mathematics anxiety in young
children: an exploratory study. Journal of Experimental Education, 81, 538–555. doi
:10.1080/00220973.2012.727888
*Hart, S. A., Logan, J. A., Thompson, L., Kovas, Y., McLoughlin, G., & Petrill, S. A.
(2016). A latent profile analysis of math achievement, numerosity, and math anxiety
in twins. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108, 181–193. doi:10.1037/
edu0000045
Hedberg, E. C. (2011). ROBUMETA: Stata module to perform robust variance estima-
tion in meta-regression with dependent effect size estimates. Boston, MA: Boston
College, Department of Economics.
Hedges, L. V., Tipton, E., & Johnson, M. C. (2010). Robust variance estimation in
meta-regression with dependent effect size estimates. Research Synthesis Methods,
1, 39–65. doi:10.1002/jrsm.5
Hembree, R. (1990). The nature, effects, and relief of mathematics anxiety. Journal for
Research in Mathematics Education, 21, 33–46. doi:10.2307/749455
*Henry, A. (2017). The role of math anxiety and situational anxiety in math perfor-
mance (Doctoral dissertation). The University of Chicago, IL.
487
Namkung et al.
*Henschel, S., & Roick, T. (2017). Relationships of mathematics performance, control
and value beliefs with cognitive and affective math anxiety. Learning and Individual
Differences, 55, 97–107. doi:10.1016%2Fj.lindif.2017.03.009
*Hill, F., Mammarella, I. C., Devine, A., Caviola, S., Passolunghi, M. C., & Szűcs, D.
(2016). Maths anxiety in primary and secondary school students: Gender differ-
ences, developmental changes and anxiety specificity. Learning and Individual
Ho, H. Z., Senturk, D., Lam, A. G., Zimmer, J. M., Hong, S., Okamoto, Y., . . . Wang,
C. P. (2000). The affective and cognitive dimensions of math anxiety: A cross-
national study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31, 362–379.
*Hunt, T. E., Bhardwa, J., & Sheffield, D. (2017). Mental arithmetic performance,
physiological reactivity and mathematics anxiety amongst UK primary school chil-
dren. Learning and Individual Differences, 57, 129–132. doi:10.1016/j.lin-
dif.2017.03.016.
Hong, S., Yoo, S. K., You, S., & Wu, C. C. (2010). The reciprocal relationship between
parental involvement and mathematics achievement: Autoregressive cross–lagged
modeling. Journal of Experimental Education, 78, 419–439.
doi:10.1080/00220970903292926
Hopko, D. R. (2003). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Math Anxiety Rating Scale–
Revised. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63, 336–351.
doi:10.1177/0013164402251041
Hopko, D. R., Mahadevan, R., Bare, R. L., & Hunt, M. K. (2003). The Abbreviated
Math Anxiety Scale (AMAS) construction, validity, and reliability. Assessment, 10,
178–182. doi:10.1177/1073191103010002008
*Jameson, M. M. (2013). The development and validation of the Children’s Anxiety in
Math Scale. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 31, 391–395. doi:10.1177
%2F0734282912470131
*Justicia-Galiano, M. J., Martín-Puga, M. E., Linares, R., & Pelegrina, S. (2017). Math
anxiety and math performance in children: The mediating roles of working memory
and math self-concept. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 573–589.
doi:10.1111/bjep.12165
*Kalaycioglu, D. B. (2015). The influence of socioeconomic status, self-efficacy, and
anxiety on mathematics achievement in England, Greece, Hong Kong, the
Netherlands, Turkey, and the USA. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 15,
1391–1401. doi:10.12738/estp.2015.5.2731
Kellogg, J. S., Hopko, D. R., & Ashcraft, M. H. (1999). The effects of time pressure on
arithmetic performance. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 13, 591–600. doi:10.1016/
S0887-6185(99)00025-0
*Kim, C., Park, S. W., & Cozart, J. (2014). Affective and motivational factors of learn-
ing in online mathematics courses. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45,
171–185. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01382.x
Krinzinger, H., Kaufmann, L., & Willmes, K. (2009). Math anxiety and math ability in
early primary school years. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 27, 206–225.
doi:10.1177/0734282908330583
*Kyttälä, M., & Björn, P. M. (2010). Prior mathematics achievement, cognitive appraisals
and anxiety as predictors of Finnish students’ later mathematics performance and career
orientation. Educational Psychology, 30, 431–448. doi:10.1080/01443411003724491
*Kyttälä, M., & Björn, P. M. (2014). The role of literacy skills in adolescents’ mathemat-
ics word problem performance: Controlling for visuo-spatial ability and mathematics
488
anxiety. Learning and Individual Differences, 29, 59–66. doi:10.1016/j.lin-
dif.2013.10.010
*Lee, B. Y. (1991). The effects of learner control and adaptive information in mathe-
matics computer-assisted instruction on achievement and task-related anxiety
(Doctoral dissertation). Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne.
*Lee, J. (2009). Self-constructs and anxiety across cultures (Research Report No. ETS
RR-09-12). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Retrieved from www.ets.
org/research/policy_research_reports/publications/report/2009/hvsn
*Lewellyn, R. J. (1990). Gender differences in achievement, self-efficacy, anxiety, and
attributions in mathematics among primarily black junior high school students
(Doctoral dissertation). The University of Akron, Akron, OH.
Lichtenfeld, S., Pekrun, R., Stupnisky, R. H., Reiss, K., & Murayama, K. (2012).
Measuring students’ emotions in the early years: The Achievement Emotions
Questionnaire–Elementary School (AEQ-ES). Learning and Individual Differences,
22, 190–201.
Liebert, R. M., & Morris, L. W. (1967). Cognitive and emotional components of test
anxiety: A distinction and some initial data. Psychological Reports, 20, 975–978. doi
:10.2466%2Fpr0.1967.20.3.975
*Lim, S. Y., & Chapman, E. (2013). An investigation of the Fennema-Sherman math-
ematics anxiety subscale. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and
Development, 46, 26–37. doi:10.1177/0748175612459198
*Lim, S. Y., & Chapman, E. (2015). Identifying affective domains that correlate and
predict mathematics performance in high-performing students in Singapore.
Educational Psychology, 35, 747–764. doi:10.1080/01443410.2013.860221
Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
*Luo, W., Aye, K. M., Hogan, D., Kaur, B., & Chan, M. C. Y. (2013). Parenting behav-
iors and learning of Singapore students: The mediational role of achievement goals.
Motivation and Emotion, 37, 274–285. doi:10.1007/s11031012-9303-8
*Luo, W., Hogan, D., Tan, L. S., Kaur, B., Ng, P. T., & Chan, M. (2014). Self-construal
and students’ math self-concept, anxiety and achievement: An examination of
achievement goals as mediators. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 17, 184–195.
doi:10.1111/ajsp.12058
*Luo, W., Lee, K., Ng, P. T., & Ong, J. X. W. (2014). Incremental beliefs of ability,
achievement emotions and learning of Singapore students. Educational Psychology,
34, 619–634. doi:10.1080/01443410.2014.909008
Lukowski, S. L., DiTrapani, J., Jeon, M., Wang, Z., Schenker, V. J., Doran, M., . . .
Petrill, S. A. (2019). Multidimensionality in the measurement of math–specific anx-
iety and its relationship with mathematical performance. Learning and Individual
*Lupkowski, A. E., & Schumacker, R. E. (1991). Mathematics anxiety among tal-
ented students. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 20, 563–572. doi:10.1007/
BF01537362
Ma, X. (1999). A meta-analysis of the relationship between anxiety toward mathemat-
ics and achievement in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics
Education, 30, 520–540. doi:10.2307/749772
Ma, X., & Xu, J. (2004). The causal ordering of mathematics anxiety and mathematics
achievement: A longitudinal panel analysis. Journal of Adolescence, 27, 165–179.
doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2003.11.003
489
Namkung et al.
Maloney, E. A., Ansari, D., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2011). Rapid communication: The effect
of mathematics anxiety on the processing of numerical magnitude. Quarterly Journal
of Experimental Psychology, 64, 10–16. doi:10.1080%2F17470218.2010.533278
Maloney, E. A., Risko, E. F., Ansari, D., & Fugelsang, J. (2010). Mathematics anxiety
affects counting but not subitizing during visual enumeration. Cognition, 114, 293–
297. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2009.09.013
Mandler, G., & Sarason, S. B. (1952). A study of anxiety and learning. Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47, 166–173. doi:10.1037/h0062855
*Marsh, H. W. (1988). The content specificity of math and English anxieties: The high
school and beyond study. Anxiety Research, 1, 137–149. doi:10.1080/10615808808
248226
*Marsh, H. W., Pekrun, R., Parker, P. D., Murayama, K., Guo, J., Dicke, T., &
Lichtenfeld, S. (2017). Long-term positive effects of repeating a year in school: Six-
year longitudinal study of self-beliefs, anxiety, social relations, school grades, and
test scores. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109, 425–438. doi:10.1037/
edu0000144
*McMillian, K. S. (2017). An examination of elementary math anxiety, self-efficacy,
and academic achievement (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest
Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No.10270027)
*Meece, J. L., Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (1990). Predictors of math anxiety and its
influence on young adolescents’ course enrollment intentions and performance in
mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 60–70. doi:10.1037/0022-
0663.82.1.60
*Mevarech, Z. R., Silber, O., & Fine, D. (1991). Learning with computers in small
groups: Cognitive and affective outcomes. Journal of Educational Computing
Research, 7, 233–243. doi:10.2190%2FBRCJ-P9K5-9E1D-2ALC
Miller, H., & Bichsel, J. (2004). Anxiety, working memory, gender, and math perfor-
mance. Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 591–606. doi:10.1016/j.
paid.2003.09.029
*Miller, S. F. (1991). A study of the relationship of mathematics anxiety to grade level,
gender, intelligence, and mathematics achievement (Doctoral dissertation). Memphis
State University, Memphis, TN.
*Morony, S., Kleitman, S., Lee, Y. P., & Stankov, L. (2013). Predicting achievement:
Confidence vs self-efficacy, anxiety, and self-concept in Confucian and European
countries. International Journal of Educational Research, 58, 79–96. doi:10.1016/j.
ijer.2012.11.002
Morris, L. W., & Liebert, R. M. (1970). Relationship of cognitive and emotional com-
ponents of test anxiety to physiological arousal and academic performance. Journal
of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 35, 332–337. doi:10.1037/h0030132
Namkung, J. M., & Fuchs, L. S. (2016). Cognitive predictors of calculations and num-
ber line estimation with whole numbers and fractions among at–risk students.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 108, 214–228. doi:10.1037/edu0000055
National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final
report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Education.
*Ottmar, E., & Landy, D. (2017). Concreteness fading of algebraic instruction: Effects
on learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 26, 51–78. doi:10.1080/10508406.2
016.1250212
490
*Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs and mathematical problem-solving of gifted
students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 325–344. doi:10.1006/
ceps.1996.0025
*Pajares, F., & Graham, L. (1999). Self-efficacy, motivation constructs, and mathemat-
ics performance of entering middle school students. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 24, 124–139. doi:10.1006/ceps.1998.0991
*Pajares, F., & Kranzler, J. (1995). Self-efficacy beliefs and general mental ability in
mathematical problem-solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 20, 426–
443. doi:10.1006/ceps.1995.1029
*Pajares, F., & Urdan, T. (1996). Exploratory factor analysis of The Mathematics
Anxiety Scale. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 29,
35–47.
Park, D., Ramirez, G., & Beilock, S. L. (2014). The role of expressive writing in math
anxiety. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 20, 103–111. doi:10.1037/
xap0000013
Passolunghi, M. C. (2011). Cognitive and emotional factors in children with mathemat-
ical learning disabilities. International Journal of Disability, Development and
Education, 58, 61–73. doi:10.1080/1034912X.2011.547351
Passolunghi, M. C., & Lanfranchi, S. (2012). Domain-specific and domain-general
precursors of mathematical achievement: A longitudinal study from kindergarten to
first grade. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 42–63.
Passolunghi, M. C., & Siegel, L. S. (2004). Working memory and access to numerical
information in children with disability in mathematics. Journal of Experimental
Child Psychology, 88, 348–367. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2004.04.002
*Pedro, J. D., Wolleat, P., Fennema, E., & Becker, A. D. (1981). Election of high school
mathematics by females and males: Attributions and attitudes. American Educational
Research Journal, 18, 207–218. doi:10.3102/F00028312018002207
*Peixoto, F., Sanches, C., Mata, L., & Monteiro, V. (2017). “How do you feel about
math?” Relationships between competence and value appraisals, achievement emo-
tions and academic achievement. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 32,
385–405. doi:10.1007/s10212-016-0299-4
Pekrun, R. (2006). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions,
corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice. Educational
Psychology Review, 18, 315–341.
Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., & Frenzel, A. C. (2005). Achievement Emotions Questionnaire-
Mathematics (AEQ-M). User’s manual. Munich, Germany: University of Munich,
Department of Psychology.
*Pekrun, R., Lichtenfeld, S., Marsh, H. W., Murayama, K., & Goetz, T. (2017).
Achievement emotions and academic performance: Longitudinal models of recipro-
cal effects. Child Development, 88, 1653–1670. doi:10.1111/cdev.12704
Peng, P., Barnes, M., Wang, C., Wang, W., Li, S., Swanson, H. L., . . .Tao, S. (2018). A
meta-analysis on the relation between reading and working memory. Psychological
Bulletin, 144, 48–76. doi:10.1037/bul0000124
Peng, P., Namkung, J., Barnes, M., & Sun, C. (2016). A meta-analysis of mathematics
and working memory: Moderating effects of working memory domain, type of
mathematics skill, and sample characteristics. Journal of Educational Psychology,
108, 455–473.
491
Namkung et al.
Peng, P., Wang, T. F., Wang, C. C., & Lin, X. (2018). A meta-analysis on the relation
between fluid intelligence and reading/mathematics: Effects of tasks, age, and social
economics status. Psychological Bulletin, 145, 189-236.
*Perry, S. M., Catapano, M., & Ramon, O. G. (2016). Teaching, academic achieve-
ment, and attitudes toward mathematics in the United States and Nigeria. Journal
for Leadership and Instruction, 15, 5–12.
*Prieto, G., & Delgado, A. R. (2007). Measuring math anxiety (in Spanish) with the
Rasch rating scale model. Journal of Applied Measurement, 8, 149–160.
Puklek Levpušček, M., & Zupančič, M. (2009). Math achievement in early adoles-
cence: The role of parental involvement, teachers’ behavior, and students’ motiva-
tional beliefs about math. Journal of Early Adolescence, 29, 541–570. doi:10.1177
%2F0272431608324189
Raghubar, K. P., Barnes, M. A., & Hecht, S. A. (2010). Working memory and mathe-
matics: A review of developmental, individual difference, and cognitive approaches.
Learning and Individual Differences, 20, 110–122.
*Ramirez, G. (2017). Motivated forgetting in early mathematics: A proof-of-concept
study. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 2087–2087. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02087
*Ramirez, G., Chang, H., Maloney, E. A., Levine, S. C., & Beilock, S. L. (2016). On
the relationship between math anxiety and math achievement in early elementary
school: The role of problem solving strategies. Journal of Experimental Child
Psychology, 141, 83–100. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2015.07.014
Ramirez, G., Gunderson, E. A., Levine, S. C., & Beilock, S. L. (2013). Math anxiety,
working memory, and math achievement in early elementary school. Journal of
Cognition and Development, 14, 187–202. doi:10.1080/15248372.2012.664593
*Reali, F., Jiménez-Leal, W., Maldonado-Carreño, C., Devine, A., & Szücs, D. (2016).
Examining the link between math anxiety and math performance in Colombian stu-
dents. Revista Colombiana de Psicología, 25, 369–379. doi:10.15446/rcp.
v25n2.54532.
*Reavis, P. S. (1987). Mathematics anxiety and the relationship between attitude, sex,
ethnicity and achievement in mathematics in three high school curriculum tracks
(Doctoral dissertation). The University of Arizona, Tucson.
*Recber, S., Isiksal, M., & Koç, Y. (2018). Investigating self-efficacy, anxiety, attitudes
and mathematics achievement regarding gender and school type. Anales de
Psicología/Annals of Psychology, 34, 41–51. doi:10.6018/analesps.34.1.229571
*Rhone, L. M. (1990). Relations between parental expectation, mathematics ability,
mathematics anxiety, achievement on mathematics word problems, and overall
mathematics achievement in black adolescents (Doctoral dissertation). New York
University, New York.
Richardson, F. C., & Suinn, R. M. (1972). The Mathematics Anxiety Rating Scale:
Psychometric data. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 19, 551–554. doi:10.1037/
h0033456
Rubinsten, O., & Tannock, R. (2010). Mathematics anxiety in children with develop-
mental dyscalculia. Behavioral and Brain Functions, 6, 1–13. doi:10.1186/1744-
9081-6-46
*Ryan, A. M., Patrick, H., & Shim, S. O. (2005). Differential profiles of students iden-
tified by their teacher as having avoidant, appropriate, or dependent help-seeking
tendencies in the classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 275–285.
doi:10.1037/0022–0663.97.2.275
492
Sackett, P. R., Kuncel, N. R., Arneson, J. J., Cooper, S. R., & Waters, S. D. (2009). Does
socioeconomic status explain the relationship between admissions tests and post-
secondary academic performance. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 1–22.
*Saigh, P. A., & Khouri, A. (1983). The concurrent validity of the mathematics anxiety
rating scale for adolescents (MARS-A) in relation to the academic achievement of
Lebanese students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 43, 633–637. doi
:10.1177%2F001316448304300237
Salamé, R. F. (1984). Test anxiety: Its determinants, manifestations and consequences.
Advances in Test Anxiety Research, 3, 83–119.
Sanders, C. E., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (1995). Does the Defining Issues Test
measure psychological phenomena distinct from verbal ability: An examination of
Lykken’s query. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 498–504.
*Satake, E., & Amato, P. P. (1995). Mathematics anxiety and achievement among
Japanese elementary school students. Educational and Psychological Measurement,
55, 1000–1007. doi:10.1177%2F0013164495055006009
*Scherer, R., & Siddiq, F. (2015). The big-fish–little-pond-effect revisited: Do differ-
ent types of assessments matter? Computers & Education, 80, 198–210.
doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.09.003
*Schnell, K., Tibubos, A. N., Rohrmann, S., & Hodapp, V. (2013). Test and math
anxiety: A validation of the German test anxiety questionnaire. Polish Psychological
Bulletin, 44, 193–200. doi:0.2478/ppb-2013-0022
*Schoeck, A. M. (1994). The effectiveness of cognitive/relaxation training in reducing
test anxiety and math anxiety and improving arithmetic performance with ninth-and
tenth-grade students (Doctoral dissertation). State University of New York at
Albany.
*Sepie, A. C., & Keeling, B. (1978). The relationship between types of anxiety and
under-achievement in mathematics. Journal of Educational Research, 72, 15–19.
doi:10.1080/00220671.1978.10885111
*Sgroi, R. J. (1991). Mathematics ability, mathematics anxiety, and gender as related
to basic mathematics skills proficiency and game performance when an externally
parametered, co-instructional mathematics simulation game is used with high
school remedial students (Doctoral dissertation). New York University, New York.
Sharma, S., & Rao, U. (1983). The effects of self-esteem, test anxiety and intelligence
on academic achievement of high school girls. Personality Study and Group
Behaviour, 3, 48–55.
*Siebers, W. M. (2015). The relationship between math anxiety and student achieve-
ment of middle school students (Doctoral dissertation). Colorado State University,
Fort Collins.
*Solazzo, L. A. (2008). The role of gender, cognition, anxiety, and competence beliefs
in predicting mathematics achievement (Doctoral dissertation). Available from
ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No.3303095)
*Soni, A., & Kumari, S. (2017). The role of parental math anxiety and math attitude in
their children’s math achievement. International Journal of Science and Mathematics
Education, 15, 331–347. doi:10.1007/s10763-015-9687-5
*Sorvo, R., Koponen, T., Viholainen, H., Aro, T., Räikkönen, E., Peura, P., . . . Aro, M.
(2017). Math anxiety and its relationship with basic arithmetic skills among elemen-
tary school children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 309–327.
doi:10.1111/bjep.12151
493
Namkung et al.
*Spinath, B., Freudenthaler, H. H., & Neubauer, A. C. (2010). Domain-specific school
achievement in boys and girls as predicted by intelligence, personality and motiva-
tion. Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 481–486. doi:10.1016/j.
paid.2009.11.028
*Stankov, L., Lee, J., Luo, W., & Hogan, D. J. (2012). Confidence: A better predictor
of academic achievement than self-efficacy, self-concept and anxiety? Learning and
Individual Differences, 22, 747–758. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2012.05.013
*Stankov, L., Morony, S., & Lee, Y. P. (2014). Confidence: the best non–cognitive
predictor of academic achievement? Educational Psychology, 34, 9–28. doi:10.108
0/01443410.2013.814194
*Stoet, G., Bailey, D. H., Moore, A. M., & Geary, D. C. (2016). Countries with higher
levels of gender equality show larger national sex differences in mathematics anxi-
ety and relatively lower parental mathematics valuation for girls. PloS One, 11,
e0153857. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0153857
Suinn, R. M., & Edwards, R. (1982). The measurement of mathematics anxiety: The
Mathematics Anxiety Rating Scale for Adolescents—MARS-A. Journal of Clinical
Psychology, 38, 576–580. doi:10.1002/1097-4679(198207)38:3<576::AID-
JCLP2270380317>3.0.CO;2-V
*Suinn, R. M., Taylor, S., & Edwards, R. W. (1988). Suinn mathematics anxiety rating
scale for elementary school students (MARS-E): Psychometric and normative data.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 48, 979–986. doi:10.1177
%2F0013164488484013
*Suinn, R. M., Taylor, S., & Edwards, R. W. (1989). The Suinn mathematics anxiety
rating scale (MARS-E) for Hispanic elementary school students. Hispanic Journal
of Behavioral Sciences, 11, 83–90. doi:10.1177%2F07399863890111007
Swanson, H. L., & Jerman, O. (2006). Math disabilities: A selective meta-analysis of
the literature. Review of Educational Research, 76, 249–274.
doi:10.3102/00346543076002249
Tankersley, K. (1993). Teaching math their way. Educational Leadership, 50, 12–13.
*Thorndike-Christ, T. (1991). Attitudes toward mathematics: Relationships to mathe-
matics achievement, gender, mathematics course-taking plans, and career interests
(Doctoral dissertation). Western Washington University, Bellingham.
*Tissot, S. L. (1997). An examination of ethnic variation in gender differences in math-
ematics attitudes and performance (Doctoral dissertation). University of Maryland
Baltimore County.
Tobias, S. (1986). Anxiety and cognitive processing of instruction. In R. Schwarzer
(Ed.), Self-related cognitions in anxiety and motivation (pp. 35–54). Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
*Tocci, C. M., & Engelhard, Jr, G. (1991). Achievement, parental support and gender
differences in attitudes toward mathematics. Journal of Educational Research, 84,
280–287. doi:10.1080/00220671.1991.10886028
*Van der Beek, J. P., Van der Ven, S. H., Kroesbergen, E. H., & Leseman, P. P. (2017).
Self-concept mediates the relation between achievement and emotions in mathemat-
ics. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 478–495. doi:10.1111/
bjep.12160
Venkatesh Kumar, G., & Karimi, A. (2010). Mathematics anxiety, mathematics perfor-
mance and overall academic performance in high school students. Journal of the
Indian Academy of Applied Psychology, 36, 147–150. doi:10.1177/02580
42X0903400406
494
*Vidovic, V. V. (1999). Self-referenced cognitions and mathematics grades in second-
ary school. Studia Psychologica, 41, 133–142.
*Vukovic, R. K., Kieffer, M. J., Bailey, S. P., & Harari, R. R. (2013). Mathematics
anxiety in young children: Concurrent and longitudinal associations with mathemat-
ical performance. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 38, 1–10. doi:10.1016/j.
cedpsych.2012.09.001
*Vukovic, R. K., Roberts, S. O., & Green Wright, L. (2013). From parental involve-
ment to children’s mathematical performance: The role of mathematics anxiety.
Early Education and Development, 24, 446–467. doi:10.1080/10409289.2012.693
430
*Wahl, M. W. (1986). Mathematics anxiety in high school students: A study of gender
and interrelated factors (Doctoral dissertation). The University of Wisconsin-
Milwaukee.
*Wang, Z., Hart, S. A., Kovas, Y., Lukowski, S., Soden, B., Thompson, L. A., . . .
Petrill, S. A. (2014). Who is afraid of math? Two sources of genetic variance for
mathematical anxiety. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 55, 1056–1064.
doi:10.1111/jcpp.12224
*Wang, Z., Lukowski, S. L., Hart, S. A., Lyons, I. M., Thompson, L. A., Kovas, Y., . . .
Petrill, S. A. (2015). Is math anxiety always bad for math learning? The role of math
motivation. Psychological Science, 26, 1863–1876. doi:10.1177/F09567976
15602471
*Wang, Z., Shakeshaft, N., Schofield, K., & Malanchini, M. (2018). Anxiety is not
enough to drive me away: A latent profile analysis on math anxiety and math motiva-
tion. PloS One, 13, e0192072. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0192072
*Wigfield, A., & Meece, J. L. (1988). Math anxiety in elementary and secondary
school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 210–216.
*Williams, J. E. (1994). Anxiety measurement: Construct validity and test perfor-
mance. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 27, 302–
307.
Wither, D. (1988). Influences on achievement in secondary school mathematics.
Unicorn, 14, 48–51.
*Wittman, T. K. (1997). The relationship between automatization of multiplication
facts and elementary school children’s mathematics anxiety (Doctoral disserta-
tion). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No.
9615505)
Wong, N. Y. (1992). The relationship among mathematics achievement, affective
variables and home background. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 4,
32–42.
*Wu, S. S., Chen, L., Battista, C., Watts, A. K. S., Willcutt, E. G., & Menon, V. (2017).
Distinct influences of affective and cognitive factors on children’s non-verbal and
verbal mathematical abilities. Cognition, 166, 118–129. doi:10.1016/j.cogni-
tion.2017.05.016
*Wu, S. S., Willcutt, E. G., Escovar, E., & Menon, V. (2014). Mathematics achieve-
ment and anxiety and their relation to internalizing and externalizing behaviors.
Journal of Learning Disabilities, 47, 503–514. doi:10.1177%2F0022219412473154
*Yáñez-Marquina, L., & Villardón-Gallego, L. (2017). Math anxiety, a hierarchi-
cal construct: Development and validation of the scale for assessing math anxi-
ety in secondary education. Ansiedad y Estrés, 2, 59–65. doi:10.1016/j.
anyes.2017.10.001
495
Namkung et al.
Yeo, J. K. K. (2005). Anxiety and performance on mathematical problem solving of
secondary two students in Singapore. The Mathematics Educator, 8, 71–83.
*Yıldırım, S. (2012). Teacher support, motivation, learning strategy use, and achieve-
ment: A multilevel mediation model. Journal of Experimental Education, 80, 150–
172. doi:10.1080/00220973.2011.596855
*Zhou, J., & Urhahne, D. (2013). Teacher judgment, student motivation, and the medi-
ating effect of attributions. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28, 275–
295. doi:10.1007/s10212-012-0114-9
*Zweibelson, I., & Lodato, F. J. (1965). Relationship of pupil anxiety and attitude to
arithmetic readiness and achievement. Psychology in the Schools, 2, 140–142.
doi:10.1002/1520-6807
Authors
JESSICA M. NAMKUNG is currently an assistant professor in the Department of Special
Education and Communication Disorders at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 359
Barkley Memorial Center, Lincoln, NE 68588-0312, USA; email: jessica.m.namkung@
gmail.com. Her research focuses on understanding cognitive, linguistic, and emotional
factors that contribute to individual differences in learning mathematics and developing
interventions for students with mathematics learning difficulties.
PENG PENG is currently an assistant professor in the Department of Special Education
at The University of Texas at Austin, 1912 Speedway, Stop D5000, Austin, TX 78712,
USA; email: pengpeng@austin.utexas.edu. His research focuses on cognitive mecha-
nisms underlying different types of learning disabilities. His research interests are
embedding working memory, executive functions, and attention training into aca-
demic instructions for children with severe learning disabilities, and meta-analysis that
looks at different aspects of reading and mathematics learning across cultures and
languages.
XIN LIN is currently a doctoral student in the Department of Special Education at The
University of Texas at Austin, 1912 Speedway, Stop D5000, Austin, TX 78712, USA;
email: xjy1105@hotmail.com. Her research interests are cognitive mechanisms under-
lying mathematics learning difficulties and the role of vocabulary understanding within
mathematics.
496

Namkung Et Al 2019 The Relation Between Mathematics Anxiety and Mathematics Performance Among School Aged Students A

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Namkung Et Al 2019 The Relation Between Mathematics Anxiety and Mathematics Performance Among School Aged Students A

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

843494

Review of Educational Research

The Relation Between Mathematics Anxiety and

Peng Peng and Xin Lin

Keywords: mathematics anxiety, mathematics performance

Mathematical proficiency is critical not only for science, technology, engi-

Deficit Theory: Grade Level

Bidirectional Theory: Temporal Relations

Effects of Mathematics Measures on Grades

defined as a measure of either negative affect (e.g., feeling of nervousness, ten-

Cognitive N/A N/A N/A

Note. MA = mathematics anxiety; MP = mathematics performance; CI = confidence interval.

Note. MA = mathematics anxiety; MP = mathematics performance; CI = confidence interval. All

You might also like